3 3) that Costa Rica abstain from executing any act or action that would affect the right to freedom of expression of the journalist, Mauricio Herrera Ulloa, and the newspaper, La Nación. 2. The order that the President of the Court (hereinafter “the President”) delivered on April 6, 2001, in consultation with the judges of the Court, in which he decided: 1. To grant the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and the State of Costa Rica until May 12, 2001, to submit the information referred to in considering paragraph 4 of this order. 2. To summon the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and the State of Costa Rica to a public hearing to be held at the seat of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights on May 22, 2001, at 10 a.m., so that the Court may hear their points of view on the facts and circumstances that motivated the request for provisional measures. 3. To request the State, as an urgent measure, to abstain from executing any action that would alter the status quo of the matter until this public hearing has been held and the Court is able to deliberate and decide on the admissibility of the provisional measures requested by the Commission. 3. The Commission’s communication of May 10, 2001, submitted in response to the decisions in the order of the President (supra having seen 2.1). In brief, the Commission indicated in this communication: a) that, essentially, the Convention establishes a system for the protection of human rights and not a system to compensate the violation of such rights, which would operate as a result of violation of the Convention; b) that the principal objective of the protective measures adopted by the Commission and the Court is to avoid a violation being committed or, if applicable, continuing to be committed, until the mechanisms of the interAmerican system of human rights have finished processing the case. c) that the urgency of the provisional measures is self-explanatory, because there is a criminal judgment, an “Order of Execution and Injunction” an order of the Inter-American Commission adopting precautionary measures, two domestic judicial decisions that disregard the precautionary measures ordered by the Commission and reiterate the court order for the immediate execution of the judgment, a decision of the tribunal that heard the case “warning” the alleged victims that “they could become guilty of the offense of disobedience to authority (Disobediencia a la autoridad)”, there is an order of the President of April 6, 2001, adopting urgent measures, and a decision of the Trial Court of the First Judicial Circuit of San José, the tribunal that heard the case, delivered a few days later, on April 24, 2001, establishing the following in its operative section: [i]n compliance with the order issued by [the President of] the Inter-American Court of Human Rights[,] concerning the application of provisional precautionary measures of an urgent nature[,] the suspension of the execution of the judgment and the respective decisions that depend on it are ordered.