8 and facilities of the RCTV television channel. On May 6, 2004 the Thirty-third Trial Court with oversight functions in the Criminal Court Circuit of the Metropolitan Area of Caracas “ratif[ied] the measures decided before by the Thirteenth Trial Court with oversight functions in the Criminal Court Circuit of the Metropolitan Area of Caracas “in favor of the technical and managerial staff, reporters, facilities, and equipment” of RCTV, and the Metropolitan Police and the 5th Regional Command of the National Guard were assigned to carry them out. The State also indicated that “the investigation with respect to the instant case is in the investigative phase, in the course of which various useful and necessary steps have been taken to elucidate the facts and to establish liabilities[...,] including, especially, the interviews with the applicants and approximately fifty (50) citizens[,…] conducting planimetric expert assessments[,] forensic medical examination of the witnesses, several technical expert analyses of objects gathered, and photographic records.” CONSIDERING: 1. The State ratified the American Convention on August 9, 1977, and pursuant to Article 62 of that Convention, it recognized the adjudicatory jurisdiction of the Court on June 24, 1981. 2. 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. With respect to this matter, Article 25(1) and 25(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court sets forth 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. [w]ith respect to matters not yet submitted to it, the Court may act at the request of the Commission. [...] 4. Article 1(1) of the Convention states the obligation of the States Parties to respect the rights and freedoms recognized in that treaty and to ensure to all persons subject to their jurisdiction the free and full exercise of those rights and freedoms. 5. In International Human Rights Law, provisional measures are not only precautionary in the sense that they maintain a legal situation, but fundamentally protective because they protect human rights, inasmuch as they seek to avoid irreparable damage to persons. Insofar as the basic requirements of extreme gravity and urgency are met, together with prevention of irreparable damage to persons, provisional measures become a true preventive judicial guarantee. 1 1 See Case of the Urso Branco Prison. Provisional Measures. July 7, 2004 Order of the InterAmerican Court of Human Rights, Considering four; Cases: Liliana Ortega et al., Luisiana Ríos et al., Luis Uzcátegui, Marta Colomina and Liliana Velásquez. Provisional Measures. May 4, 2004 Order of the Inter-