5 14. The Inter-American Court is competent to hear this case, pursuant to Articles 62(3) and 63(1) of the American Convention, because Honduras has been a State Party to the Convention since September 8, 1977, and accepted the compulsory jurisdiction of the Court on September 9, 1981. IV PROVISIONAL MEASURES 15. On November 28, 2008, the representatives requested the Court to order the State to adopt provisional measures for the benefit of one of the eyewitnesses of the murder of Mrs. Kawas-Fernández. On November 29, 2008, the Court issued a Resolution ordering the State to take the measures required to protect the life and personal integrity of Mr. Dencen Andino-Alvarado, a witness in the investigation carried out in Honduras concerning the murder of Mrs. Kawas-Fernández.6 16. Said provisional measures are in full force and effect as of the date of this Judgment. V ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF INTERNATIONAL RESPONSIBILITY 17. In its answer to the application, the State partially acknowledged its international responsibility (supra paras. 7 and 8). The State repeated this acquiescence during the public hearing and in its final written arguments (supra paras. 10 and 12). 18. The State limited its acquiescence to the claims of the Inter-American Commission and of the representatives concerning the alleged violations of Articles 8 (Right to a Fair Trial) and 25 (Right to Judicial Protection) of the American Convention, in conjunction with Articles 1(1) and 2 thereof, to the detriment of “the next of kin of Blanca Jeannette KawasFernández” (supra para. 7). The State accepted “the arguments used by the parties concerning the violation of [the said] rights.” Nevertheless, Honduras rejected and contested the allegations concerning its international responsibility for the supposed violation of Articles 4 (Right to Life) and 16 (Freedom of Association) of the Convention, to the detriment of Blanca Jeannette Kawas-Fernández, and of Article 5 (Right to Humane Treatment) thereof, to the detriment of her “next of kin,” all in relation to Article 1(1) thereof (supra para. 7). 19. With regard to the facts, the State acknowledged the results achieved owing to the work of Blanca Jeannette Kawas-Fernández as a “defender of human rights and the conservation of the environment and natural resources,” and affirmed that it “regretted the events that caused her irreparable loss […].” However, it indicated that “the investigations into the case under domestic law had not found that State agents had taken part in the crime perpetrated against Mrs. Kawas-Fernández.” It also denied that “[this] case reflects the situation of defenders of the environment and natural resources in Honduras, as well as the attacks against the said individuals and the obstacles to the investigation of the acts of harassment and aggression against them,” and that “the impunity in the Kawas case generated a context of violence against environmentalists” (supra para. 8). 6 Cf. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of November 29, 2008.