4. The briefs of January 31, February 1 and 15, 2011, and their attachments, in which, inter alia, the State, the Commission and the representative, respectively, forwarded their accreditations for the public hearing. 5. The brief of February 24, 2011, and its attachments, in which the representative submitted observations and asked the Court to maintain the provisional measures. 6. The brief of February 24, 2011, in which the State accredited a deputy agent for the public hearing. 7. The public hearing on the provisional measures held on February 25, 2011, during the ninetieth regular session of the Inter-American Court,2 the oral arguments of the parties, and the brief and attachments presented by the State on that occasion. 8. The brief of February 28, 2011, in which the State requested an extension of the time frame for presenting certain information required by the Court during the public hearing. 9. The communication of February 28, 2011, in which the Secretariat, on the instructions of the acting President of the Court, granted the State an extension of the time frame for forwarding the information requested. 10. The briefs of March 2, 2011, and their attachments, in which the State requested an additional extension of the time to present the information required by the Court during the public hearing, forwarded additional observations on various issues and, lastly, advised that “on February 25, [2011] the Chinese People’s Assembly had approved the abolishment of capital punishment for the offense of smuggling,” attaching a document in this regard. 11. The brief of March 3, 2011, and its attachment, in which the State sent additional observations regarding the said abolition of the death penalty. CONSIDERING THAT: 1. Peru ratified the American Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter also “the American Convention” or “the Convention”) on July 28, 1978, and, pursuant to its Article 62, accepted the compulsory jurisdiction of the Court on January 21, 1981. 2. Article 63(2) of the American Convention establishes that “in 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.” This provision is, in turn, regulated by Article 27 of the Court’s Rules of Procedure.3 2 There appeared at this hearing: (a) for the Inter-American Commission: Paulo Sérgio Pinheiro, Commissioner, and Silvia Serrano Guzmán, legal adviser; (b) for the representatives: Luis Lamas Puccio and Chan Kin Mui, and (c) for the State: Delia Muñoz Muñoz and Ada Constantino. 3 Rules of Procedure approved by the Court at its eighty-fifth regular session held from November 16 to 18, 2009. 2