3 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 Inter-American Court of Human Rights of November 17, 1999, Provisional Measures in the Digna Ochoa and Plácido et al. Case, fifth preambular paragraph; Order of the Inter-American 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 Álvarez 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 InterAmerican Court of Human Rights of July 26, 1995, Provisional Measures in the CarpioNicolle 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 preamgular 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 InterAmerican Court of Human Rights of January 15, 1988, Provisional Measures in the Velásquez-Rodríguez, Fairén-Garbi and Solís-Corrales, and Godínez-Cruz Cases; Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of December 7, 1994, Provisional Measures in the Caballero-Delgado and Santana Case; Orders of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of September 22, 1995, and April 18, 1997, Provisional Measures in the Blake Case; Order of the President of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of June 30, 1998, and Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of August 29, 1998, both as to the Provisional Measures in the Bámaca-Velásquez Case); with all the more reason is the adoption of provisional measures justified when it is a petitioner in a contentious case pending before the Court, who claims that she fears for her personal integrity.) 9. That, on this point, as this Court has already stated, “it is the responsibility of the State to adopt security measures to protect all those who are subject to its jurisdiction; this obligation is even more evident as regards those who are involved in proceedings before the supervisory organs of the American Convention” (cf. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of November 17, 1999, Provisional Measures in the Digna Ochoa and Plácido et al. Case, seventh preambular paragraph). 10. That the purpose of provisional measures, under the national legal systems (domestic procedural law) in general, is to preserve the right s of the contending parties, ensuring that the future judgement on merits is not harmed by their actions pendente lite. 11. That, under the International Law of Human Rights, the purpose of provisional measures goes further, as, besides their essentially preventive character, they effectively protect fundamental rights, inasmuch as they seek to avoid irreparable damage to persons. […] 13. That, in accordance with Article 25(4) of the Rules of Procedure, the President of the Court is only authorized to order such urgent measures as may be necessary to ensure the effectiveness of any provisional measures subsequently ordered by the Court at its next period of sessions (cf. inter alia, Order of the President of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of February 10, 1998, in the Paniagua Morales et al. and Vásquez et al. Cases; and Order of the President of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights), of July 29, 1997, Provisional measures in the Cesti-Hurtado Case). And in whose operative part it decided