7 25. The communication of the Secretariat of January 26, 2006, whereby, following the President’s directions, the Court acknowledged the resignation of the Corporación Jurídica Libertad as representative of the beneficiaries of these measures, and requested the Commission and the Corporación Jurídica Libertad to inform the Court as to who would be representing the beneficiaries of these provisional measures. CONSIDERING: 1. That Colombia ratified the American Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter “the American Convention” or “the Convention”) on July 31, 1973 and recognized the jurisdiction of the Inter-American Court, in accordance with Article 62 thereof, on June 21, 1985. 2. That Article 63(2) of the American Convention provides that “[i]n 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.” 3. That Article 25(1) of the Court Rules of Procedure provides that “[a]t any stage of the proceedings 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 such provisional measures as it deems pertinent, pursuant to Article 63(2) of the Convention.” 4. That Article 1(1) of the Convention establishes the general obligation of the States Parties to respect the rights and freedoms enshrined therein and to ensure to all persons subject to their jurisdiction the free and full exercise of those rights and freedoms, which entails the duty to adopt such measures as may be necessary to ensure their protection. These obligations become even more apparent in relation to those involved in proceedings before the supervisory bodies of the American Convention.1 5. That under International Human Rights Law, provisional measures are not only precautionary in the sense that they preserve a legal situation, but fundamentally protective in that they safeguard human rights, insofar as they seek to prevent irreparable damage to persons. Provided that the basic requirements of extreme gravity and urgency and the need to prevent irreparable damage to persons are met, provisional measures become a true preventive judicial guarantee.2 1 Cf., inter alia, Matter of Eloisa Barrios et al. Provisional Measures. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of September 22, 2005, Considering clause No. 6, Matter of the Peace Community of San José de Apartadó. Provisional Measures. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of March 15, 2005, Considering clause No. 5, and Matter of the Communities of Jiguamiandó and Curbaradó. Provisional Measures. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of March 15, 2005, Considering clause No. 5. 2 Cf., inter alia, Matter of Eloísa Barrios et al., supra note 1, Considering clause No. 7; Matter of Luisiana Ríos et al (Radio Caracas Televisión – RCTV). Provisional Measures. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of September 12, 2005, Considering clause No. 4, and Matter of Urso Branco Prison. Provisional Measures. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of September 21, 2005, Considering clause No. 5.