2 b) the Commission acknowledged receipt of that communication to the petitioner by means of a note dated April 1, 1998, and placed it under study; c) on June 26, 1998, the Commission received written notification from the petitioners that the preceding day Mr. Thomas had been informed that he is to be hanged on June 30, 1998, at 6:00 a.m.; d) having established that the petitioners had presented elements sufficient to meet the requirements of the Convention and Regulations, the Commission opened Case 12.021 on June 26, 1998, and requested Trinidad and Tobago to present the respective information. 5. The working agenda of the Court, according to which the XLI Regular Session will be held from August 24 to September 5, 1998, at its seat in San Jose, Costa Rica. CONSIDERING: 1. That Trinidad and Tobago has been a State Party to the American Convention since May 28, 1991, and that it accepted the jurisdiction of the Court on the same day. 2. That Article 63(2) of the Convention provides that: [i]n 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. 3. That, according to the allegations of the Commission, it has not had the opportunity to complete its examination of the complaint and to issue its decision in Case 12.021. Consequently, the situation, as described by the Commission in its request, constitutes a prima facie case of extreme gravity and urgency which could result in irreparable damage to the alleged victim in said Case. 4. That Article 25(4) of the Rules of Procedure provides that: [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. 5. That the execution of the death penalty in the case of the alleged victim would necessarily affect the Court’s consideration of the Commission’s request for provisional measures, by rendering moot the object of any eventual decision in his favor. 6. That the Case referred to in the Commission’s request has not been submitted to the Court, and, therefore, the adoption of urgent measures does not imply a decision on the merits of the existing controversy between the petitioners and the State. By adopting urgent measures, this Presidency is ensuring that the Court may carry out effectively its conventional mandate. 7. That, given the aforementioned reasons, it is pertinent to call upon Trinidad and Tobago to adopt such urgent measures as may be necessary to preserve the life of Darrin