(supra para. 123) cannot be avoided or conditioned by domestic legal proceedings or provisions of any kind. 155 This relates to Article 2 of the Convention, according to which the States Parties must adopt, in accordance with their constitutional processes and the provisions of the Convention, such legislative or other measures as may be necessary to give effect to the rights and freedoms protected in this instrument. 156 C.2.1) Regarding Decree-Law No. 2,191 “granting amnesty” 150. In the judgment in the case of Almonacid Arellano et al. v. Chile, the Court declared that “[b]ecause it seeks to grant amnesty to those responsible for crimes against humanity, Decree Law No. 2,191 is incompatible with the American Convention and, therefore, lacks legal effects in light of this treaty.” 157 It ordered the State “to ensure that Decree Law No. 2,191 does not continue representing an obstacle to the investigation, prosecution and punishment, as appropriate, of those responsible for other violations similar” to those of this case, which concerns an extrajudicial execution. 158 On that occasion, the Court “call[ed] attention to the fact that crimes against humanity, such as […] torture, were not excluded from the amnesty provisions.” 159 At the stage of monitoring compliance with that judgment, the Court has not yet declared that this order has been complied with. 160 The Court considers pertinent, in the context of this case, to repeat that, as determined in the case of Almonacid Arellano et al. v. Chile, Decree Law No. 2,191 cannot represent an obstacle for the investigation, prosecution and punishment of the respective crimes. In this regard, it recalls that the corresponding decisions taken in the above-mentioned judgment have general effects that go beyond that specific case. 161 151. In the said judgment, the Court stated that: The obligation under international law to prosecute and, if they are declared guilty, punish the perpetrators of certain international crimes, which include crimes against humanity, derives from the obligation to ensure rights established in Article 1(1) of the American Convention. […] Crimes against humanity result in the violation of a series of non-derogable rights recognized in the American Convention that cannot remain unpunished. 162 152. On that occasion, the Court also recalled that it: Had already indicated in the case of Barrios Altos [v. Peru] that, ‘amnesty provisions, the statute of limitations, and the establishment of mechanisms that exclude responsibility and that seek to prevent the investigation and punishment of those responsible for gross human rights violations, such as torture, summary, extralegal or arbitrary executions, and forced disappearances, all of 155 Cf. Case of Contreras et al. v. El Salvador. Merits reparations and costs. Judgment of August 31, 2011. Series C No. 232, para. 128, para. 127, and Case of Gudiel Álvarez (Diario Militar) v. Guatemala, supra, para. 230. 156 Cf. Case of Genie Lacayo v. Nicaragua, supra, para. 51, and Case of Mendoza et al. v. Argentina, supra, para. 323. 157 Case of Almonacid Arellano et al. v. Chile, supra, third operative paragraph. 158 Case of Almonacid Arellano et al. v. Chile, supra, para. 145. 159 Case of Almonacid Arellano et al. v. Chile, supra, para. 116. 160 According to the respective Order issued in November 2010 (Cf. Case of Almonacid Arellano et al. v. Chile. Monitoring compliance with judgment. Order of the Court of November 18, 2010, second declarative paragraph). 161 Cf. similarly, Case of Barrios Altos v. Peru. Interpretation of the judgment on merits. Judgment of September 3, 2001. Series C No. 83, para. 18, and Case of Vélez Loor v. Panama, supra, para. 244. 162 Case of Almonacid Arellano et al. v. Chile, supra, paras. 110 and 111. 47