can be adopted “in any stage of the proceeding,”4 which, without a doubt and as indicated below, ends in a final judgment. It is clear that this case does not involve a matter 5 that has not yet been filed before the Court. Moreover, under such a hypothesis, for the Court to decree provisional measures, it would be necessary for the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, hereinafter the Commission, to request the measures, and such a request has not been made. To the contrary, it was Mr. Huberth May Cantillano, representative of the victims in this case, who made the request, and at that, “during the implementation stage of the judgment.” What remains irrefutable is that the Court has heard the matter in which a request for provisional measures has been made, and the case has ended in a final and not subject to appeal judgment.6 Thereby lacking the power to modify or complement it, the Court can only render a decree orders in this regard that unequivocally stem from powers specifically expressed in the Convention, the Statute or Rules of Procedure of the Court. Indeed, once the judgment in a case has been rendered, the Court can only, pursuant to that which is stated in the Convention, interpret it if this is so required 7 and inform the General Assembly of the Organization of American States, in the annual report it must provide, if it has not been carried out. 8 In turn and under such a hypothesis, the 4 Art. 27, 1 and 2: “1. At any stage of proceedings involving cases of extreme gravity and urgency, and when necessary to avoid irreparable damage to persons, the Court may, on its own motion, order such provisional measures as it deems appropriate, pursuant to Article 63(2) of the Convention. 2. With respect to matters not yet submitted to it, the Court may act at the request of the Commission” 5 “Case” and “matter” are, in this regard, synonyms pursuant to the Convention, and it alludes to “matters” only in the text of Article 63(2), while in five other provisions it refers to “cases” (Art.57: power to appear before the Court, Art. 61 its jurisdiction, Art. 65: the obligation to report its work to the General Assembly of American States yearly, Art.68(1): the obligation to comply with the judgments and Art. 69: provide notification. But, it is also in the Statute of the Court, where in two of its provisions it refers to “matters.” In one, it refers to the powers of the President of the Court, which may apply to the advisory opinions of the Court as well as administrative matters (Art. 12(2)), and in the others, it refers to the contentious jurisdiction (Art. 19(1), (2) and (3)), and impediments and powers of the judges in contentious matters). Also, the Rules of Procedure of the Court, approved by it, uses the text “case” in 32 of its articles (Arts, 2(3), 2(17), 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 25, 26, 27(3), 30, 32, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39(1), 39(2), 39(4), 40(1), 40(2), 41(2), 42(6), 43, 44(1), 44(3), 48(1)(b),(d),(e), 51(1) and 51(10). And only in one article, specifically Article 27(2), regarding provisional measures ordered per request of the Commission, does it use the term “matter”. 6 Art.67, first phrase, of the Convention: “[t]he judgment of the Court shall be final and not subject to appeal.” 7 Art. 67, second phrase, of the Convention. “In case of disagreement as to the meaning or scope of the judgment, the Court shall interpret it at the request of any of the parties, provided the request is made within ninety days from the date of notification of the judgment.” 8 Art. 65 of the Convention: “To each regular session of the General Assembly of the Organization of American States the Court shall submit, for the Assembly's consideration, a report on its work during the previous year. It shall specify, in particular, the cases in which a state has not complied with its judgments, making any pertinent recommendations.” 2