9. On October 19, 2005, additional information supplied by the State was conveyed to the petitioner, giving it one month to comment. On November 9, 2005, the petitioner made a written request that the petition be ruled admissible and asked for a copy of the transcript of the October 18, 2005, hearing. On December 8, 2005, the Commission provided a copy. 10. As regards the precautionary measures procedure, at the hearing held during the Commission's 123rd regular session the petitioner requested precautionary measures to preserve the rights of the alleged victims against alleged violations by the State.1 On November 10, 2005, the IACHR asked the State to file comments on the request for precautionary measures. On November 18, 2005, the State replied that precautionary measures were not needed because its internal protection mechanisms were sufficient to guarantee the Community's property rights. On January 25, 2006, the petitioner provided additional information. III. POSITIONS OF THE PARTIES A. Petitioner 11. The petitioner explains that the Garífuna people are distributed over various communities and their presence in the present-day territory of Honduras dates back to 1791. For a long time, the petitioner adds, they asked the State to recognize their ancestral possession of their lands. 12. On September 28, 1978, the State, through its National Agrarian Institute (INA) gave them a deed guaranteeing occupancy of 126.40 hectares, 2 on the basis of Article 36 of the Honduran Agrarian Reform Law, which provides: Lands that when this law takes effect are occupied by villages or hamlets whose existence is not based on a labor contract between their inhabitants and the owner of those lands, shall be expropriated and awarded to the respective community. Included in the preceding paragraph are portions of properties that have been and are being cultivated by neighbors of the villages or hamlets. 13. In addition, the petitioner reports, in 1993 the INA gave the community a deed of full ownership over 380 hectares in a section of land not included in the land covered by the deed guaranteeing occupancy.3 14. The Triunfo de la Cruz Community, despite its titles to the property it occupies, has had serious problems because of the interest of public officials and third parties in their lands, particularly by reason of their tourism potential because they are on the shores of the Caribbean. 15. One example is the conflict over expansion of the downtown area of the Municipality of Tela. In 1989 this municipality asked the INA to enlarge its urban limits, and the INA did so in 1992 by resolution 055-1989, which was submitted to the Ministry of Culture and Tourism for 1 The petitioner asked that the State be barred from entering into legal transactions and contracts involving real estate of the Garífuna Community of Triunfo de la Cruz, because of imminent danger and irreparable harm to the cultural and physical survival of the Garífuna communities, State inaction in the face of countless complaints, the entry into force of a new property law that would hurt the rights of the Garífuna communities, and the new mega-tourism projects in the area. 2 The deed guaranteeing occupancy states: "the Executive Director of the National Agrarian Institute, in the exercise of the authority vested in him by Articles 135 (b) and 144 (a) and (g), in relation to Article 36 of the Agrarian Reform Law, guarantees occupancy of the property measuring 126.4 hectares located in Aldea del Triunfo de la Cruz, Municipality of Tela, Department of Atlántida, which has the following boundaries: to the north, the Caribbean Sea, to the south, Roberto Yuin and the Standard Fruit Company, to the east, Río Plátano, to the west, Roberto Yuin. Executed in favor of the Garífuna Community of Triunfo de la Cruz. Done in the city of Tegucigalpa on September 28, 1979." 3 This provides that, notwithstanding the transfer, title is subject to the condition that if the sale or donation of parcels from the awarded land is allowed, it will be authorized for tourism projects approved by the Honduran Tourism Institute in favor of descendents of the beneficiary ethnic community. 2