Radio Globo” and the house inhabited by the family. However, according to the State, "unfortunately the police officials in charge of carrying out[... those patrols] have been prevented by the [... possible] beneficiary and his immediate family because they refuse to sign the logbook kept for that purpose, saying that they will not sign until they are provided with full personal security, [… that is], a permanent police detail." The State finds that these "statements […] are inconsistent by virtue of the fact that the [… possible] beneficiary rejected the idea of permanent police bodyguards" offered by the National Police and requested the establishment of a "budgetary fund for hiring private personal security [...] to provide permanent security.” Likewise, it indicated that Mr. Galdámez demanded that the fund be financed by the Office of the Secretary Of State in the Security Office. However, he never submitted his request to that body. d) Mr. Galdámez has demonstrated "an uncooperative attitude […] toward the police officers in charge of carrying out the patrols, as they have been […] treated badly” by him, and e) “The Human Rights Unit […] launched the [ex officio] investigations [… related with the attack suffered by the possible beneficiary] on September 16, [… 2010], giving a response almost immediately and even putting itself at the disposal of the [possible] beneficiary and offering him all necessary cooperation , both in the investigation and for his personal protection […]." Those investigations have been carried out "with priority […], such that they are already reaching their conclusion and coming up with positive results, including identifying possible suspects and locating the vehicle they were driving at the moment of committing the criminal infraction […]." CONSIDERING THAT: 1. The Republic of Honduras ratified the American Convention on human rights on September 8, 1977, and, in keeping with Article 62 of the Convention, recognized the contentious jurisdiction of the Court on September 9, 1981. 2. Article 63(2) of the American Convention holds that, “In cases of extreme gravity and urgency, and when necessary to avoid irreparable damage to persons, the Court shall adopt such provisional measures as it deems pertinent in matters it has under consideration. With respect to a case not yet submitted to the Court, it may act at the request of the Commission.” This provision is also set forth in Article 27 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court. 3. The provision established in Article 63(2) of the Convention make the provisional measures ordered by this Tribunal obligatory for the State, as the basic principles of international law, based on international case law, have indicated that States must comply with their obligations under the Convention in good faith (pacta sunt servanda).2 2 Cf. Case of James et al. Provisional Measures regarding Trinidad and Tobago. Order of the InterAmerican Court of Human Rights of June 14, 1998, 19, Considering six; Matter of Guerrero Larez. Provisional Measures regarding Venezuela. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of November 17, 2009,