3 [...] [i]f the Court is not sitting, the President, in consultation with the Permanent Commission and, if possible, with the other judges, shall call upon the Government concerned to adopt such urgent measures as may be necessary to ensure the effectiveness of any provisional measures subsequently ordered by the Court at its next session. 4. That, from these provisions, it is evident that the Court, or, when appropriate, its President, may act de oficio in cases of extreme gravity and urgency to avoid irreparable damage to persons. The Court has already done so previously (Order of January 15, 1988, Provisional Measures in the Velásquez Rodríguez, Fairén Garbi and Solís Corrales, and Godínez Cruz cases, fourth and fifth preambular paragraphs). As the Court is not sitting, the President is authorized to adopt urgent measures de oficio in such cases of extreme gravity and urgency to avoid irreparable damages to persons. 5. That Article 1.1 of the Convention establishes the obligation of States Parties to respect the rights and freedoms recognized therein and to ensure their free and full exercise to all persons subject to their jurisdiction. 6. That the Court is authorized to adopt provisional measures in cases of extreme gravity and urgency to avoid irreparable damage to persons (Article 63.2 of the Convention). In this case, in relation to the request contained in the section “Having Seen”, 1.a (supra), this implies safeguarding the personal integrity of Mrs. Revoredo. 7. That the information submitted in this case reveals a prima facie threat to the integrity of Mrs. Revoredo. The standard of prima facie appreciation of a case and the application of assumptions in view of the needs of protection have led this Court to order provisional measures on various occasions (cf. inter alia, Order of the InterAmerican Court of Human Rights of November 17, 1999, Provisional Measures in the Digna Ochoa y Plácido et al case, fifth preambular paragraph; Order of the InterAmerican Court of Human Rights of June 3, 1999, Provisional Measures in the Cesti Hurtado case, fourth preambular paragraph; Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of May 27, 1999, Provisional Measures in the James et al case, eighth preambular paragraph; Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of June 19, 1998, Provisional Measures in the Clemente Teherán et al case, fifth preambular paragraph; Order of the President of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of July 22, 1997, Provisional Measures in the Alvarez et al case, fifth preambular paragraph; Order of the President of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of August 16, 1995, Provisional Measures in the Blake case, fourth preambular paragraph; Order of the President of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of July 26, 1995, Provisional Measures in the Carpio Nicolle case, fourth preambular paragraph; Order of the President of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of June 4, 1995, Provisional Measures in the Carpio Nicolle case, fifth preambular paragraph; Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of December 7, 1994, Provisional Measures in the Caballero Delgado and Santana case, third preambular paragraph; and Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of June 22, 1994, Provisional Measures in the Colotenango case, fifth preambular paragraph). 8. That, in its jurisprudence, this Court has protected witnesses who have made statements before it by adopting provisional measures (cf. inter alia, Order of the