68 | Report on the Situation of Human Rights in the Dominican Republic establishes mechanisms for the protection of the rights recognized therein, such as the Inter-American Commission and the Inter-American Court, 145 and its provisions are applied as a function of the concept of collective protection. 146 138. As for the workings of the system of protection that the American Convention establishes, the Commission must underscore the fact that once a State agrees to the optional clause accepting the Inter-American Court’s contentious jurisdiction, that State is bound by all the Convention’s provisions and fully obligated to guarantee the international protection of the human rights recognized in that Convention. Article 62(1) of the American Convention provides that: [a] State Party may, upon depositing its instrument of ratification or adherence to this Convention, or at any subsequent time, declare that it recognizes as binding, ipso facto, and not requiring special agreement, the jurisdiction of the Court on all matters relating to the interpretation or application of this Convention. 139. There is no provision in the American Convention that expressly authorizes States Parties to withdraw their declaration of acceptance of the compulsory jurisdiction of the Inter-American Court. Thus, any State Party that accepted the Court’s compulsory jurisdiction can only extricate itself from that commitment by renouncing the entire treaty. 147 Should that occur, Article 78 of the American Convention provides that a State’s denunciation of the Convention shall take effect one year after notification of its denunciation. The Inter-American Court has also written that: [a]cceptance of the Court’s binding jurisdiction is an ironclad clause to which there can be no limitations except those expressly provided for in Article 62(1) of the American Convention. Because the clause is so fundamental to the operation of the Convention’s system of protection, it cannot be at the mercy of limitations not already stipulated but invoked by States Parties for internal reasons. 148 140. Regarding the observance, application and interpretation of treaties, Article 26 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (hereinafter “the Vienna Convention”) establishes the principle of pacta sunt servanda, which states that “[e]very treaty in force is binding upon the parties to it and must be performed by them in good faith.” Hence the Dominican State’s duty to honor the obligations it has internationally undertaken concerning the human rights of all persons subject to its jurisdiction. 145 146 147 148 nd American Convention on Human Rights (Pact of San José). November 22 , 1969. Article 33. See also in this regard, European Commission of Human Rights, Decision as to the Admissibility of Application No. 788/60, Austria vs. Italy case, Yearbook of the European Convention on Human Rights, The Hague, M. Nijhoff, 1961, p. 140; Eur. Court HR, Ireland vs. United Kingdom case, judgment of 18 January 1978, Series A no. 25, p. 90, par. 239; Eur. Court H.R., Soering Case, decision of 26 January 1989, Series A no. 161, par. 87. I/A Court H.R., Case of Ivcher Bronstein v. Peru. Competence. Judgment of September 24, 1999, paragraphs 40, 46 and 50. I/A Court H.R., Case of Ivcher Bronstein v. Peru. Competence. Judgment of September 24, 1999. par. 36. Organization of American States | OAS