Addressing the first strand, the court noted that allowing a judicial enquiry into the gravity of the crime would defeat the purpose of immunity, which is to avoid the trial process. Additionally, that there is little support in international conventions and state practice for the idea that severity of a crime could eliminate state immunity. The court distinguished the "Pinochet" case, in which Augusto Pinochet was arrested despite immunity as a head of state, by stating that "Pinochet" was a criminal case against an individual, not a civil case against a state itself.