met. In this way, provisional measures become a real jurisdictional guarantee of a preventive nature.4 7. Based on its jurisdiction, in approaching consider only the arguments that relate strictly need to avoid irreparable damage to persons. All analyzed and ruled on during the consideration of provisional measures, the Court must to extreme gravity, urgency, and the other facts and arguments can only be the merits of a contentious case.5 8. The three conditions contained in Article 63(2) of the Convention must coexist and must be present in all the situations in which the Tribunal is asked to order provisional measures.6 9. This request for provisional measures is not related to a case before the Court. Rather, it originated with a request for precautionary measures filed before the InterAmerican Commission. The Court does not have information on whether the events under the consideration of the Court are part of a contentious proceeding in the InterAmerican System or whether a petition has been submitted to the Inter-American Commission regarding the merits of this request.7 a) Request for provisional measures 10. The Inter-American Commission indicated that on July 24, 2009, it decided to amplify the precautionary measures granted to the former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Honduras, and it consequently requested the adoption of the measures necessary to guarantee the life, personal integrity, and freedom of expression of Mr. Luís Galdámez Álvarez, given the acts of harassment he and his immediate family have been subjected to. All this allegedly took place in retaliation for his work as a journalist and his critical stance toward the current government. 11. The State presented information to the Court regarding the measures it has allegedly adopted in response to the request for precautionary measures issued by the Inter-American Commission (supra Having Seen 6 and 8). 4 Cf. Case of “La Nación” Newspaper. Provisional Measures regarding Costa Rica. Order of the InterAmerican Court of Human Rights, of September 7, 2001; Considering 4. Matter of Mery Naranjo et al., supra footnote 2, Considering 5, and Matter of Alvarado Reyes et al. supra footnote 2, Considering 5. 5 Cf. Matter of James et al. Provisional Measures regarding Trinidad and Tobago. Order of the President of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of August 29, 1998, considering clause six; Matter of Mery Naranjo et al., supra footnote 2, Considering 69, and Matter of Alvarado Reyes et al. supra footnote 2, Considering 58. 6 Cf. Case of Carpio Nicolle et al. Provisional Measures regarding Guatemala. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of July 6, 2009, Considering 14; Matter of Mery Naranjo et al., supra footnote 2, Considering 2, and Matter of Alvarado Reyes et al. supra footnote 2, Considering 43. 7 On prior occasions, this Court has interpreted the phrase “case not yet submitted to the Court” of Articule 63(2) of the American Convention to mean that there is at least a possibility that the matter that gave rise to the provisional measures will be submitted to the Court under its contentious jurisdiction. For that minimum possibility to exist, the procedure stipulated in articles 44 and 46 to 48 of the American Convention must have been initiated. Cf. Matter of García Uribe et al. Request for Provisional Measures regarding Mexico. Order of the Inter-American Court for Human Rights of February 2, 2006, Considering 3 and 4; Matter of Centro Penitenciario de Aragua "Cárcel de Tocorón." Provisional Measures regarding Venezuela. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of November 24, 2010, Considering 5, and Matter of Alvarado Reyes et al. supra footnote 2, Considering 30. 11