SEPARATE OPINION OF JUDGE A.A. CANÇADO TRINDADE 1. In my separate opinion I concur with this Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights regarding Provisional Measures of Protection in the matter of the Integrantes del Equipo de Estudios Comunitarios y Acción Psicosocial (Members of the Community Studies and Psycho-social Action Team) (Case of the Plan de Sánchez Massacre) v. Guatemala. In addition, I feel obliged to state in this brief Separate Opinion —my last Separate Opinion for this Court concerning Provisional Protection Measures— my views on certain issues I have been rasing before the Court over the last few months, in order to strengthen this preventive mechanism for the protection of rights. In particular, I am making reference to some problems that have arisen in the practice under the American Convention, which arose out of the fact that provisional measures ordered by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights coexist with those ordered by the Inter-American Court, in light of the imperative of individuals' direct access to international justice. In the following sections I will briefly discuss, under the usual time constraints, my views on this subject, both de lege lata and de lege ferenda. I. Brief Thoughts de Lege Lata 2. This IACHR case of the members of the Equipo de Estudios Comunitarios y Acción Psicosocial (Community Studies and Psychosocial Action Team) (ECAP) (case of the Plan de Sánchez Massacre) was commenced through a request for Provisional Protection Measures, filed with this Court on October 15, 2006, by the Centro para la Acción Legal en Derechos Humanos (Center for Legal Action in Human Rights) (CALDH), to protect the lives and physical integrity of the members of the Asociación Civil Equipo de Estudios Comunitarios y Acción Psicosocial (Community Studies and Psychosocial Action Team Organization). Ever since this Court issued its Judgment of November 19, 2004 in the case of the Plan de Sánchez Massacre (reparations), the ECAP has been involved in a number of activities with the survivors of the massacre in the communities of the municipality of Rabinal, Baja Verapaz, Guatemala, with an aim to follow up on the reparation measures ordered by this Court. 3. In consideration of the fact that the above-mentioned request was submitted to the Court by the representatives of the victims and their relatives in a case —i.e., the case of the Plan de Sánchez Massacre— proceeding before the Court in the Compliance with Judgment stage, the Court held that the request for Provisional Protection Measures met the requirements set forth in Article 63(2) of the American Convention on Human Rights and Article 25 of the Court's Rules of Procedures, and adopted the appropriate Measures through the Order of November 25, 2006. 4. Ironically, the same day the Court took cognizance of the request that originated these Protection Measures —i.e., the day before yesterday, November 23, 2006— it also received another submission concerning the case of the Movimento dos Servidores Públicos Aposentados e Pensionistas (MOSAP),9 regarding Brazil, in which Provisional Protection Measures were being requested. The Court only informed MOSAP's representative10 that it lacked jurisdiction to hear the request,11 inasmuch as 9 . Brief of November 10, 2006 filed by MOSAP's legal representative (Mr. L. A. Costa de Medeiros). 10 . Letter from the Court’s Secretariat of November 24, 2006, to MOSAP’s legal representative.