3 Considering, 1. That Guatemala is a State Party to the American Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter referred to as “the American Convention” or “the Convention”) since May 25, 1978 and it has acknowledged the adversarial jurisdiction of the Court on March 9, 1987. 2. That the provision of Article 63(2) of the Convention sets forth the mandatory adoption on the part of the State of the provisional measures Ordered by this Court, as pursuant to the basic legal principle of liability of the State supported by international case law, the States must comply with their conventional obligations in good faith (pacta sunt servanda).2 3. That the Court has pointed out that provisional measures have two characters: a provisional character and a protective character.3 The protective character of provisional measures is related to the context of international adversarial lawsuits. In that sense, the purpose of these measures is to protect the rights at possible risk until the dispute is solved. Their purpose is to guarantee the integrity and effectiveness of the Order on the merits so as to avoid damage to the rights in dispute, a situation which may turn the final Order innocuous or distort its effective application. Thus, provisional measures allow that the interested State is able to comply with the final Order and, should it be the case, proceed to the ordered reparations.4 As to the protective character of provisional measures, this Court has pointed out that they turn into a real jurisdictional guarantee of preventive nature, as they protect human rights because they seek to avoid irreparable damage to persons.5 * * * 4. That Article 63(2) of the Convention sets forth that in Order for the Court to Order provisional measures three requirements are necessary: i) ��extreme gravity”; ii) “urgency”, and iii) they must be necessary “to avoid irreparable damage to persons.” Those three conditions coexist and must be present in any situation in Commission, Helen Beatriz Mack-Chang for the victims and the beneficiaries of the provisional measures, and Delia Marina Dávila-Salazar and María Elena de Jesús Rodríguez-López appeared for the State. 2 Cf. Matter of James et. al. Provisional Measures regarding Trinidad and Tobago. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of June 14, 1998, sixth considering clause; Case of Pueblo Indigena Kankuamo. Provisional Measures regarding Colombia. Order of April 3, 2009, fifth considering clause; and Matter of Fernández-Ortega et al. Provisional Measures regarding the United Mexican States. Order of the Court of April 30, 2009, sixth considering clause. 3 Cf. Case of Herrera Ulloa. Provisional Measures regarding Costa Rica. Order of the Court of September 7, 2001, fourth considering clause; Matter of Fernández-Ortega et al., supra note 2, considering clause 5; and Cae of Carpio Nicolle et al. Provisional Measures regarding Guatemala. Order of the Court of July 6, 2009. Considering clause 16. 4 Cf. Matter of Capital El Rodeo I and El Rodeo II Judicial Confinement Center. Provisional Measures regarding Venezuela. Order of the Court of February 8, 2008, seventh considering clause; Matter of Newspapers "El Nacional" and "Así es la Noticia". Provisional Measures regarding Venezuela. Order of the Court of November 25, 2008, twenty-third considering clause; and Matter of Luis Uzcátegui. Provisional Measures regarding Venezuela. Order of the Court of January 27, 2009, nineteenth considering clause. 5 Cf. Case of Herrera Ulloa, supra note 3, Considering clause 4, Case of Bámaca-Velásquez, Provisional Measures regarding Guatemala. Order of the Court of January 27, 2009, forty-fifth considering clause; and Matter of Fernández-Ortega et al., supra note 1, fifth considering clause.