[I]n cases of extreme gravity and urgency, and when necessary to avoid irreparable damage to persons, the Court shall adopt such provisional measures as it deems pertinent in matters it has under consideration. With respect to a case not yet submitted to the Court, it may act at the request of the Commission. 3. This matter is regulated under Article 27 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court (hereinafter “the Rules of Procedure”).5 4. Based on its jurisdiction, within the framework of provisional measures the Court can only and strictly consider those arguments directly related to extreme gravity, urgency and the need to prevent irreparable damage to persons. Any other issue or claim shall be analyzed and resolved during the consideration of the merits of the contentious case.6 5. In relation to the situation of the child LM, the State and the representatives have essentially reported the following: a) On August 2, 2011 the Supreme Court of Justice of Paraguay issued a decision addressed to the “Defensoría de la Niñez y la Adolescencia” (Ombudsman’s Office for Children and Adolescents) in which it ordered the implementation of all means necessary to comply with the provisional measure of the Inter-American Court; b) On August 23, 2011 the Ombudsman’s Office for Children and Adolescents requested that the Court of First Instance for Children and Adolescents implement the provisional measure ordered by the Inter-American Court and confirmed by the Supreme Court; c) On that same date the judge of first instance in charge of the proceedings summoned the parents, the grandparents and the family with custody of LM to a hearing on August 31. On this occasion a psychologist and a social worker of the judicial branch were also summoned; d) That same day the attorney of the O-A couple objected to the acting judge, filed a motion for the annulment of the proceedings and requested that the hearing be suspended; e) On August 31, 2011 all the summoned parties appeared before the Court, except for the O-A couple, with custody of the child. The hearing took place and the judge ordered immediate compliance with the operative paragraphs established by the Inter-American Court in the Order of July 1, 2011, and called for provisional visiting arrangements to be made with the extended family (maternal grandparents) as of September 6, 2011; f) On September 5, 2011 the O-A couple filed another motion of annulment and appealed against the ruling of August 31, considering that “the procedural acts performed are invalid since they were in violation of the rules of due process” and contravene the legal provisions that stipulate the mandatory and unavoidable presence of children’s representatives in proceedings of this nature; 5 Rules of Procedure of the Court approved during its Eighty-fifth Regular Period of Sessions held from November 16 to 28, 2009. 6 Cf. Matter of James et. al. Provisional Measures regarding Trinidad and Tobago. Order of the Inter-American Court of August 20, 1998, Considering paragraph 6; and Matter of the Jiguamiandó and Curvaradó Communities. Provisional Measures regarding Colombia. Order of the Inter-American Court of November 25, 2011, Considering paragraph 5 3