4 day it was clear that there is “mistrust of security forces, due to information being leaked and because groups operating out of them could be carrying out political acts of violence.” CONSIDERING: 1. The State ratified the American Convention on May 25, 1978 and, pursuant to Article 62 of the Convention, it accepted contentious jurisdiction of the Court on March 9, 1987. 2. Article 63(2) of the American Convention provides that, in cases of “extreme gravity and urgency, and when necessary to avoid irreparable damage to persons,” the Court may, in matters it has under consideration, adopt the provisional measures it deems pertinent, and in cases not yet submitted to the Court, it may act at the request of the Commission. 3. Pursuant to the provisions of Article 25(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court, [a]t any stage of the proceedings involving cases of extreme gravity and urgency, and when necessary to avoid irreparable damage to persons, the Court may, at the request of a party or on its own motion, order such provisional measures as it deems pertinent, pursuant to Article 63(2) of the Convention. [...] 4. Article 1(1) of the Convention states the duty of the States Party to respect the rights and freedoms recognized in that treaty and to ensure to all persons subject to their jurisdiction the free and full exercise of those rights and freedoms. 5. The background submitted by the Commission in its request (supra Having Seen 2 and 3) demonstrates prima facie the existence of a situation of extreme gravity and urgency regarding the lives and physical safety of Helen Mack Chang, Viviana Salvatierra and América Morales Ruiz, of Luis Roberto Romero Rivera and of the other members of the Myrna Mack Foundation. 6. The purpose of provisional measures, in International Human Rights Law, is to effectively protect fundamental rights, inasmuch as they seek to avoid irreparable damage to persons. Granting of provisional measures, due to their own juridical nature and object, does not prejudge on the merits of the case of anthropologist Myrna Mack, which is being processed in the Court against the Guatemalan State. 7. The State has the responsibility to adopt security measures to protect all persons under its jurisdiction, and this duty becomes even more evident regarding persons who are involved in proceedings before the protection bodies of the American Convention. 8. Guatemala also has an obligation to investigate the facts that gave rise to this request for provisional measures, with the aim of identifying those responsible and punishing them as appropriate. 9. The August 14, 2002 Order of the President of the Court was in accordance with the facts and circumstances and in accordance with the law, all of which justified adopting urgent measures.