4 1. That the State ratified the American Convention on August 9, 1977, and, pursuant to Article 62 of the Convention, recognized the contentious jurisdiction of the Court on June 24, 1981. 2. That Article 63(2) of the American Convention establishes that, in cases “extreme gravity and urgency, and when necessary to avoid irreparable damage persons,” the Court shall adopt such provisional matters as it deems pertinent matters it has under consideration and, with respect to a case not yet submitted it, it may act at the request of the Commission. of to in to 3. That, according to Article 25(1) and 25(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court: At any stage of the proceedings involving cases of extreme gravity and urgency, and when necessary to avoid irreparable damage to persons, the Court may, at the request of a party or on its own motion, order such provisional measures as it deems pertinent, pursuant to Article 63(2) of the Convention. With respect to matters not yet submitted to it, the Court may act at the request of the Commission. […] 4. That Article 1(1) of the Convention indicates the obligation of the States Parties to respect the rights and freedoms recognized therein and to ensure their free and full exercise to all persons subject to their jurisdiction. 5. That the information presented by the Commission in its request (supra second, third and fourth having seen paragraphs) reveals prima facie the existence of a situation of extreme gravity and urgency for the life, safety and freedom of expression of the journalists, Marta Colomina and Liliana Velásquez, of the program “La Entrevista”, which TELEVEN transmits daily. 6. That, in general, under domestic legal systems (internal procedural law), the purpose of provisional measure is to protect the rights of the parties in dispute, ensuring that the judgment on merits is not prejudiced by their actions pendente lite. 7. That, under international human rights law, the purpose of urgent and provisional measures goes further, because, in addition to their essentially preventive nature, they protect fundamental rights, inasmuch as they seek to avoid irreparable damage to persons. 8. That it is the responsibility of the State to adopt safety measures to protect all persons who are subject to their jurisdiction and that this obligation is even clearer with regard to those who are involved in proceedings before the organs of protection of the American Convention. 9. That, furthermore, the State has the obligation to investigate the facts that gave rise to this request for provisional measures in order to identify those responsible and impose the pertinent punishments. THEREFORE: