5 the State ask the Inter-American Court whether the provisional measures called for in its September 7, 2001 order (supra paragraph 17) apply to the entire judgment. 20. On August 26, 2002, the Court issued an order on the provisional measures, wherein it resolved: 1. To stipulate that the provisional measures ordered refer specifically to: a) taking, without delay, whatever steps are required to annul the entry of Mauricio Herrera Ulloa’s name in the Judiciary’s Record of Convicted Felons until a final decision is reached on this case by the bodies of the inter-American human rights system; b) suspending the order to publish in the daily “La Nación” the “Now Therefore” section of the conviction decided by the Criminal Trial Court of the First Circuit of San José on November 12, 1999; and c) suspending the order to establish a “link”, in La Nación Digital, between the disputed articles and the operative paragraphs of that judgment. 2. To stipulate that the aforementioned provisional measures were decreed to attain the effects stated in the ninth Whereas of that Order, independently of the civil, criminal, or other projections of points 1), 4), and 6) of the aforementioned judgment by the Criminal Trial Court of the First Circuit in San José. 4 21. On November 18 and 20, 2002, the Commission and the petitioners, through their intermediary, petitioned the Court in connection with the brief filed by the State on July 30, 2002 (supra para. 19) and the August 26, 2002 order (supra para. 20), to have this order rescinded so that the Commission might have an opportunity to present the observations it deemed pertinent with regard to the Costa Rican initiative. 22. On November 22, 2002, the Court decided to dismiss the Commission’s request (supra para. 21) to rescind the Court’s August 26, 2002 order (supra para. 20) and to keep intact the decisions made by the Inter-American Court in its earlier orders since, under Article 25(1) of its Rules of Procedure, “it has inherent authority [as part of its jurisdictional attributes] to issue, at the request of a party or on its own motion, instructions for enforcement of the precautionary measures it orders.” 5 23. On December 3, 2002, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Costa Rica sent the Inter-American Court a letter rogatory from the Criminal Court of the First Judicial Circuit of San José, dated November 28, 2002, wherein it reported that it had denied the remedy filed by Mr. Fernando Guier Esquivel to have the October 24, 2002 order for enforcement of judgment issued by that San José court vacated. The remedy was denied on the grounds that “the court [did] not have legal authority to suspend enforcement of those parts of a final judgment that the Inter-American Court did not order stayed.” 24. On January 13, 2003, the Commission stated that it had no observations on the State’s letter rogatory (supra para. 23) and forwarded the observations made in this regard by the representatives of the alleged victims. Those representatives had 4 Cf. The “La Nación” Case. Provisional Measures. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of August 26, 2002, operative paragraphs one and two. 5 Cf. The “La Nación” Case. Provisional Measures. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of November 22, 2002, considering six and single operative paragraph.