7 20. The April 24, 2006 letter from the Secretariat, whereby it requested that the State “clarify whether the images submitted by the beneficiaries on video or in the appendix to their latest comments were broadcasted by a state TV channel, and whether they are currently shown on the air.” CONSIDERING: 1. That Venezuela has been a State Party to the American Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter, “the Convention” or the “American Convention”) since August 9, 1977, and that, pursuant to Article 62 thereof, it recognized the jurisdiction of the Court on June 24, 1981. 2. That Article 63(2) of the American Convention provides that in cases of “extreme gravity and urgency, and when necessary to avoid irreparable damage to persons,” the Court may, in matters not yet submitted to the Court, adopt such provisional measures at the Commission’s request as it may deem pertinent. 3. That in the International Law of Human Rights, provisional measures are not only precautionary to the extent that they maintain the legal status quo, but also and essentially they are protective in nature, as they protect human rights, insofar as they are intended to avoid irreparable damage to persons. Provided that the basic requirements of extreme gravity and urgency and prevention of irreparable damage to persons are met, provisional measures become a true preventive judicial guarantee.1 4. That it is essential for provisional measures to remain in full force and produce effects until such time as they are rescinded by the Tribunal and the State is notified of the Court’s decision in this regard. 5. That provisional measures are extraordinary in nature and ordered based on the need for protection and, once ordered, they must remain in place, provided, however, that in the Court’s view the basic requirements of extreme gravity and urgency and prevention of irreparable damage to the beneficiaries continue to be satisfied. 6. That under Article 63(2) of the Convention, the State’s adoption of such provisional measures as may be ordered by the Tribunal is mandatory, since the fundamental principle of the law on international responsibility of the State, as supported by international case law, mandates that States should comply with their contractual obligations in good faith (pacta sunt servanda).2 1 Cf. Matter of the Forensic Anthropology Foundation (Guatemala). Provisional Measures. Order of the President of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of April 21, 2006, Considering clause No. 5; Case of “19 Tradesmen.” Provisional Measures. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of April 28, 2006, Considering clause No. 8; Matter of Yare I and Yare II Capital Region Penitentiary Center (Yare Prison). Provisional Measures. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of March 30, 2006, Considering clause No. 5. 2 Cf. Matter of the Communities of Jiguamiandó and Corbaradó. Provisional Measures. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of February 7, 2006, Considering clause No. 7; Matter of the Peace Community of San José de Apartadó. Provisional Measures. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human