ORDER OF THE INTER-AMERICAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS ∗ OF MARCH 31, 2014 PROVISIONAL MEASURES REGARDING THE REPUBLIC OF PERU CASE OF WONG HO WING HAVING SEEN: 1. The Order of the former President in-exercise in this case (hereinafter “the President in exercise) of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Inter-American Court,” “the Court,” or “the Tribunal”) of March 24, 2010, as well as the Orders of this Court of May 28 and November 26, 2010, March 4 and July 1, 2011, wherein it was decided to inter alia, require the Republic of Peru (hereinafter “the State” or “Peru”) to refrain from extraditing Mr. Wong Ho Wing. 2. The Order of the Court of October 10, 2011, wherein it was decided to lift the provisional measures that had been ordered. 3. The Order of the Court of June 26, 2012, wherein the State was required to “refrain from extraditing Mr. Wong Ho Wing until December 14, 2012, in order for the InterAmerican Commission to examine and rule on case No. 12.794.” 4. The Order of the former President in-exercise of December 6, 2012, as well as the Orders of the Court of February 13, May 22, and August 22, 2013, and of January 29, 2014, wherein the validity of the present measures was extended. In the last of these, the Court decided to: 1. Require the State, in accordance with the provisions of the [that] Order, to abstain from extraditing Mr. Wong Ho Wing until the Court resolves this case in a definite manner in the context of its contentious jurisdiction. 2. Require the State to maintain the Court informed about the situation of the deprivation of liberty of Mr. Wong Ho Wing, and, to this end, it must submit a report to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights by June 2, 2014, at the latest. 3. Request the representative of Mr. Wong Ho Wing to submit any observations deemed pertinent to the report requested in the preceding operative paragraph within four weeks from the date of receipt of the aforementioned report from the State. 4. Request the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights to present any observations it deems relevant to the report from the State requested in the second operative paragraph and the corresponding comments of the representative of the beneficiary within two weeks of the deadline for the submission of the foregoing observations of the representative. ∗ Judge Diego García-Sayán, of Peruvian nationality, did not participate in the hearing or deliberation of this order, pursuant to that established in Articles 19(2) of the Statute and 19(1) of the Rules of the Court.