brought to its attention form part of an adversarial proceeding before the Inter-American system or if a petition on the merits related with this request has has been brought before the Inter-American Commission. 10. On previous occasions, this Court has interpreted the phrase "a case not yet submitted to the Court” contained in fine in Article 63(2) of the American Convention presupposes that there exists at least the possibility that the matter motivating the request for provisional measures could be brought before Tribunal and its contentious jurisdiction. In order for that minimum possibility to exist, the proceeding established in articles 44 and 46 to 48 of the American Convention must have been initiated before the Commission.6 11. The Court has previously found it necessary to clarify that, given the tutelary nature of provisional measures (supra Considering 5), in exceptional cases and even when there is no specific adversarial case before the Inter-American system, it is possible for the Court to order them in situations in which, prima facie, the grave and urgent infraction of human rights could take place.7 To do so, the Court must weigh the problem in question, the effectiveness of State actions given the situation described, and the degree of lack of protection faced by individuals for whom the measures are requested in the event that the measures are not adopted. To accomplish this objective, it is necessary for the Inter-American Commission to have presented sufficient grounds that meet the aforementioned standards and for the State to have failed to demonstrate clearly and sufficiently the effectiveness of the specific measures that it has adopted domestically.8 12. Article 63(2) of the Convention requires that in order for the Court to issue provisional measures, three conditions must be met: i) “extreme gravity;” ii) “urgency,” and iii) “avoiding irreparable damage to persons.” These three conditions coexist and must be present in every situation in which the Court’s intervention is requested9 I. Regarding the request to broaden measures to the benefit of relatives of the beneficiaries 13. The President observes that in its request to broaden the measures, the Commission reported on a number facts that took place with regard to beneficiary José Ángel Alvarado Favela, father of the allegedly disappeared José Ángel Alvarado Herrera, in connection with the investigation into what happened to the beneficiaries who were presumably disappeared (supra Having Seen 7). Regarding these facts, this Presidency notes that Mexico alleges a supposed lack of availability of the representatives and beneficiaries to collaborate with the investigation, but it also notes that the State 6 Cf. Matter of García Uribe et al. Request for Provisional Measures regarding Mexico. Order of the Court of February 2, 2006, Considering 3 and 4; Matter of Alvarado Reyes et al. Provisional Measures regarding Mexico. Order of the Court of November 26, 2010, Considering 31, and Matter of José Luis Galdámez Álvarez et al. Provisional Measures regarding Honduras. Order of the Court of February 22, 2011, Considering 9. 7 Cf. Matter of Capital El Rodeo I & El Rodeo II Judicial Confinement Center. Provisional Measures regarding Venezuela. Order of the Court of February 8, 2008, Considering 9; Matter of María Lourdes Afiuni. Provisional Measures regarding Venezuela. Order of the President of the Court of March 10, 2010, Considering 7, and Matter of the Unidad de Internación Socioeducativa. Provisional Measures regarding Brazil. Order of the Court of February 25, 2011, Considering 6. 8 Cf. Matter of Capital El Rodeo I & El Rodeo II Judicial Confinement Center, supra footnote 7, Considering 9; Matter of María Lourdes Afiuni, supra footnote 7, Considering 7, and Matter of the Unidad de Internación Socioeducativa, supra footnote7, Considering 6. 9 Cf. Case of Carpio Nicolle et al. Provisional Measures regarding Guatemala. Order of the Court of July 6, 2009, Considering 14; Matter of the Unidad de Internación Socioeducativa, supra footnote 7, Considering 7, and Matter ofMery Naranjo et al., supra footnote2, Considering 10. 7