Court, if it were to grant such measures, this would imply that the case is still under consideration, that the controversy it has heard and resolved in fact continues. As such, if such measures are rendered it would be important for the Court to recognize that the corresponding judgment, which declared that “there has been a violation of a right or freedom protected” in the Convention, and thus, provided “the injured party be ensured the enjoyment of his right or freedom that was violated” 14, has not fulfilled its objective, has not been sufficient to “avoid the irreparable harm” that the violation caused in each person, that is, that it has not resolved the matter or case that was filed before the Court and thus it is paramount that such measures be issued. For the abovementioned reasons, I consider that perhaps it should be necessary that in judgments where the Court declares a violation of the Convention, the Court expressly recall the State’s general and permanent obligation to “respect the rights and freedoms recognized” in the Convention and to “ensure to all persons subject to their jurisdiction the free and full exercise of those rights,”15 and that this specifically includes the obligation to “avoid irreparable damage to persons” 16 involved in the case and matter at hand. Perhaps, it would be similarly convenient for the Court to order that, as part of the monitoring of compliance with the respective judgment, that it be informed of the measures adopted by the State to eradicate the situations of extreme gravity or urgency that gave rise to the provisional measures rendered in the case in order to “avoid irreparable damage to persons.” And, certainly, all this does not prevent the Court from once again ordering provisional measures regarding the same persons named in the case that was previously decided by the Court, either in a new matter filed before the Court or in one that has not yet been filed, if the Commission so requests. EDUARDO VIO GROSSI Judge Pablo Saavedra Alessandri Secretary 14 Art. 63(1) of the Convention: “If the Court finds that there has been a violation of a right or freedom protected by this Convention, the Court shall rule that the injured party be ensured the enjoyment of his right or freedom that was violated. It shall also rule, if appropriate, that the consequences of the measure or situation that constituted the breach of such right or freedom be remedied and that fair compensation be paid to the injured party.” 15 Art. 1(1) of the Convention:” “he States Parties to this Convention undertake to respect the rights and freedoms recognized herein and to ensure to all persons subject to their jurisdiction the free and full exercise of those rights and freedoms, without any discrimination for reasons of race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, economic status, birth, or any other social condition.” 16 Art.63(2) of the Convention. 4