5 8. The notes of the Secretariat CDH-11.016/417 of November 23, 2004; CDH11.016/432 of January 25, 2005; CDH-11.016/439 of February 17, 2005; CDH11.016/568 of October 21, 2005; CDH-11.016/620 of February 7, 2006; CDH11.016/631 of February 23, 2006; and CDH-11.016/647 of March 22, 2006; whereby the request for the observations regarding the compliance with the measures ordered in behalf of Ángel del Rosario Vásquez-Chumo was reiterated to the representative thereof. CONSIDERING: 1. That Peru has been a State Member to the Inter-American Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter “the American Convention” or “the Convention”) since July 28, 1978 and recognized the contentious jurisdiction of the Court on January 21, 1981. 2. That Article 63(2) of the American Convention provides that, “in cases of extreme gravity and urgency and when necessary to avoid irreparable damage to persons,” the Court may order such provisional measures as it deems pertinent in matters it has under consideration. 3. That pursuant to Article 25 of the Court’s Rules of Procedure (hereinafter “the Rules”), 1. 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.” […] 6. The beneficiaries of provisional measures or urgent measures ordered by the President may address their comments on the report made by the State directly to the Court. The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights shall present observations to the State's report and to the observations of the beneficiaries or their representatives. 4. That Article 1(1) of the Convention enshrines the duty of the States Parties to ensure to all persons subject to their jurisdiction the free and full exercise of the rights and freedoms protected by such treaty. 5. That, specifically, as the Court has already stated, “it is the duty of the State to adopt security measures to protect all persons subject to its jurisdiction, a duty which is even more obvious in relation to the parties to proceedings started before the oversight bodies of the American Convention.”1 6. That under Human Rights International Law provisional measures are not only precautionary in that they preserve a legal status, but essentially protective for they protect Human Rights, as they seek to prevent irreparable damage to persons. These measures are applied as long as the prerequisites of extreme gravity and urgency and 1 Cf. Case of 19 Tradesmen. Provisional Measures. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of July 4, 2006, Considering clause No. 7; Matter of the Communities of Jiguamiandó and Curbaradó. Provisional Measures. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of February 7, 2006, Considering clause No. 4; and Matter of the Peace Community of San José de Apartadó. Provisional Measures. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of February 2, 2006, Considering clause No. 4.