6. The public hearing held on February 23, 2012, as well as the documents presented by the State on that occasion and the minutes of the meeting held by the parties and the Inter-American Commission after the hearing. 7. The briefs of March 20, May 22 and 30, 2012, by which the State submitted reports on the implementation of the provisional measures. 8. The briefs of March 2, April 10 and June 7, 2012, in which the representatives submitted their observations on the State’s briefs, information regarding the implementation of the measures, and provided the aforementioned minutes of the meeting (supra Having Seen clause 6). 9. The briefs of March 19 and June 26, 2012, by which the Inter-American Commission submitted its observations on the implementation of the provisional measures. CONSIDERING THAT: 1. The Republic of Honduras ratified the American Convention on Human Rights on September 8, 1977, and, in accordance with article 62 therein, it accepted the binding jurisdiction of the Court on September 9, 1981. 2. Article 63(2) of the American Convention establishes that “[i]n cases of extreme gravity and urgency, and when necessary to avoid irreparable damage to persons, the Court shall adopt provisional measures as it deems pertinent in matters 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 Rules of Procedure of the Court. The provisions of Article 63(2) confer an obligatory character on any provisional measures ordered by this Court, in conformity with a basic principle of international law, supported by international jurisprudence, whereby States are required to comply with international treaty obligations in good faith (pacta sunt servanda).1 3. In International Human Rights Law, provisional measures are not only preventive in nature, in the sense that they preserve a juridical situation, but they are also essentially protective inasmuch as they seek to safeguard human rights and avoid irreparable damage to persons.2 According to Article 63(2) of the Convention, three conditions must be met in order for the Court to be able to order provisional measures: a) “extreme gravity”; b) “urgency”; and c) the need “to avoid irreparable damage to persons.” These three conditions coexist and must be present in all instances in which the Court’s intervention is sought. Likewise, the three conditions described must persist for the Court to maintain the protection measures ordered. If one of these conditions is no longer in effect, then the Court shall assess the need to continue with the protection so ordered.3 1 See Matter of James et al. Provisional Measures regarding Trinidad and Tobago. Order of the InterAmerican Court of Human Rights of June 14, 1998, Considering clause 6; and Matter of the Socio-Educational Internment Facility. Provisional Measures regarding Brazil. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of April 27, 2012, Considering clauses two and three 2 See Case of “La Nación” Newspaper. Provisional Measures regarding Costa Rica. Order of the InterAmerican Court of Human Rights of September 7, 2001, considering clause four and Matter of the SocioEducational Internment Facility supra note 1; Considering clause four. 3 See Case of Carpio Nicolle. Provisional Measures regarding Guatemala. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of July 6, 2009, Considering clause fourteen; and Case of Haitian and Haitian-Origin Dominican Persons in the Dominican Republic. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of February 29, 2012, Considering clause 5. 2