6 Convention and Article 25 of the Rules of Procedure. Consequently, the Commission requested that the Court order the State: i) to take “all measures necessary to preserve the life and physical integrity of Michael Huggins, so as not to hinder the processing of his case before the Inter-American system”, and that “said measures include the urgent adoption of all actions necessary to stay the execution scheduled for Monday, 23 May 2005”; and ii) to “inform the Court concerning the measures taken to comply with the present request.” 21. The Order of May 20, 2005 issued by the President of the Court, which decided: 1. To require the State to adopt, without delay, all of the necessary measures to preserve the life and physical integrity of Michael Huggins, so as not to hinder the processing of his case before the Inter-American system. 2. To require the State, pursuant to the Court’s Order of November 25, 2004 and the President’s Order of February 11, 2005, to maintain all of the necessary measures to preserve the life and physical integrity of Lennox Boyce, Jeffrey Joseph, and Frederick Atkins, so as not to hinder the processing of their cases before the Inter-American system. 3. To require the State to inform the Inter-American Court, within 10 days of the notification of the […] Order, regarding the steps it has taken in fulfillment of th[e] Order. 4. To require the representatives of the beneficiary of the present urgent measures to submit their observations on the State’s report within five days of its reception, and to require the Commission to submit its observations on the State’s report within seven days of its reception. 5. To require the State, after the submission of its first report, to continue informing the Court every two months regarding the measures it adopts with respect to Messrs. Huggins, Atkins, Boyce and Joseph, and to require the representatives of the beneficiaries of the present provisional measures and the Commission to submit their observations on those State reports within four and six weeks, respectively, of the reception of such reports. […] 22. The communication of May 27, 2005, in which the State submitted a report in response to the President’s Orders of May 20 and February 11, 2005 and the Court’s Order of November 25, 2004. Barbados advised the Tribunal that “the alleged victims Lennox Boyce, Jeffrey Joseph, Frederick Atkins and Michael Huggins remain incarcerated in Barbados, West Indies, and have not been executed.” Furthermore, the State once again reiterated the terms of its December 16, 2004 letter (supra fourth “Having Regard To”). 23. The communication of June 3, 2005, in which the Commission submitted its observations on the State’s report of May 27, 2005. In addition to reiterating comments made in its February 25, 2005 submission to the Court (supra fifteenth “Having Regard To”), the Commission advised that on May 31, 2005, the Court of Appeal of Barbados commuted the death sentences of Messrs. Boyce and Joseph to life imprisonment. However, the Commission indicated that the State is considering an appeal of said decision to the Caribbean Court of Justice, which possibly could restore the original death sentences. In consequence, the Commission requested the Court to maintain the current provisional measures in favor of Lennox Boyce, Jeffrey Joseph, Frederick Atkins, and Michael Huggins. WHEREAS: