6 2. To require the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago to submit an urgent communication to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights no later than July 24, 1998, on the measures taken in compliance with this Order, as well as its observations on the measures requested by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, so that this information can be studied by the Court. 3. To require the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights to present its observations on the urgent communication submitted by the State within two days of the receipt of said document. 4. To submit the request of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, this Order, and the urgent communication that will be presented by the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago for the consideration of the InterAmerican Court of Human Rights during the related hearing to be held on August 28, 1998, at its XLI Regular Session. c. The report of the State of July 28, 1998, in response to the Order of the President of July 22, 1998. d. The observations of the Commission on the report by the State of July 28, 1998, which were submitted on July 30, 1998, in accordance with the Order of the President of July 22, 1998. 5. The Court summarizes the content of the State’s reports of June 5, June 30, June 29, July 8, July 15 and July 28, 1998, in regard to the above matters as follows: a. read; The State cannot stay an execution until the Warrant of Execution has been issued and b. the Commission is empowered by Article 41 to make recommendations only; and, therefore, it cannot overturn judgments from the State’s domestic courts; c. the delay in the proceedings before the Commission, and the failure of the Commission to follow the approximately eight month timeframe established by the State for appeals to international bodies, constitutes cruel and unusual punishment as defined by the State’s domestic laws as established by the case of Pratt and Morgan, and would de facto abolish the death penalty, thereby usurping the legislative functions of the State of Trinidad and Tobago; d. the State followed due process in all of the present cases, including an appeal to the highest court of appeal, and the Commission would still have other options available to compensate any violations it finds subsequent to an execution; e. international organs have a duty to create the necessary machinery to allow a State to comply with its own domestic laws and its constitutional obligations in the field of human rights; f. the State made reference to its reservation to the American Convention in regard to the jurisdiction of the Court, which reads as follows: As regards Article 62 of the Convention, the Government of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago recognizes the compulsory jurisdiction of the InterAmerican Court of Human Rights as stated in said article only to such extent that recognition is consistent with the relevant sections of the Constitution of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago; and provided that any judgment of the