5 7. The note of May 19, 2003, of the Secretariat of the Court in which it reiterated to the State that it must present the report, which should have been presented on May 10, 2003, in compliance with the fourth operative paragraph of the above-mentioned Order (supra sixth having seen paragraph). 8. The State’s communication of May 26, 2003, in which it advised that “it is implementing the expansion of the safety measures requested to protect the life and safety of Jorge Guillermo Lemus Alvarado and his next of kin [and that] it will be reporting on the measures taken by the investigating body to identify the persons responsible for these facts.” CONSIDERING: 1. That the State ratified the American Convention on May 25, 1978, and, in accordance with Article 62 of the Convention, recognized the contentious jurisdiction of the Court on March 9, 1987. 2. That Article 63(2) of the American Convention establishes that, in cases “extreme gravity and urgency, and when necessary to avoid irreparable damage persons,” the Court shall adopt such provisional measures it deems pertinent matters it has under consideration; and with respect to a case not yet submitted the Court, it may act at the request of the Commission. 3. of to in to That, in the terms of article 25(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court: At any stage of the proceeding 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 whatever provisional measures it deems appropriate, pursuant to Article 63(2) of the Convention. [...] 4. That Article 1(1) of the Convention stipulates the obligation of the States Parties to respect the rights and freedoms recognized therein and to ensure their free and full exercise to all persons subject to their jurisdiction. 5. That the information submitted by the Inter-American Commission (supra fourth having seen paragraph) reveals prima facie the existence of a situation of extreme gravity and urgency for the life and safety of Jorge Guillermo Lemus Alvarado and his next of kin, which justifies the expansion of provisional measures to include them. 6. That it is the State’s responsibility to adopt safety measures to protect all persons subject to its jurisdiction and, in particular, it must adopt such measures in favor of persons who are involved in internal proceedings that are part of the substance of a proceeding before the organs of protection of the American Convention. 7. That, in general, under domestic legal systems (internal procedural law), the purpose of provisional measure is to protect the rights of the parties in dispute,