CONCURRING OPINION OF JUDGES SERGIO GARCÍA RAMÍREZ AND ALIRIO ABREU BURELLI The jurisprudence of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights has evolved considerably with regard to the subjective scope of the provisional measures adopted by the Court. This evolution is appropriate considering the important ends that provisional measures are intended to achieve. In our concurring opinion to the Order for provisional measures of November 24, 2000, in the case of the Peace Community of San José de Apartadó, we indicated the pertinence of expanding the scope of the measures, when advisable, so as to encompass a group of identifiable persons, even when they had not yet been specified precisely. On that occasion, we said that the reason to proceed as called for in our separate opinion - and, of course, in the Court’s Order itself - was the fact that the plurality covered by the measures was composed of persons “who are potentially placed in the situation of being victims of acts by authorities or persons connected to them in one way or another.” We also observed that “membership of the group of potential victims who benefit from the measures is not based on the precise identification and indication of each individual by name, but according to objective criteria - based on the linkage of membership and the observed risks - which will permit the beneficiaries to be specified when the measures are implemented. The intention is to encompass the danger faced by the members of a community, not merely a few individuals, as is generally the case. It is also necessary to take into account that one of the elements of this case, which could characterize other cases, is that the potential victims choose not to provide their names, owing to the very real risk that this identification might increase their exposure to the irreparable damage that we are trying to prevent.” We are pleased to observe that this criterion, accepted for the first time in the said Order corresponding to the Peace Community of San José de Apartadó, is the one that prevails today in the Court’s jurisprudence, as can be observed in the measures adopted for the Communities of the Jiguamiandó and the Curbaradó. In this case, the measures encompass a group of identifiable persons who, because they form part of a community, are in a situation of grave risk. Also, the State’s obligation to protect the beneficiaries of the measures does not exist merely in relation to the formal agents of the State itself, but also in relation to the actions of individual third parties who may violate the rights of the beneficiaries, as described in the Order to which this concurring opinions corresponds. Sergio García-Ramírez Judge Alirio Abreu-Burelli Judge

Select target paragraph3