5 4. [g]uarantee safe conditions enabling members of the Kankuamo indigenous people who have been forcibly displaced to return to their ancestral territory. The Commission also asked that the Court “instruct the State that the provisional measures ordered are to be decided by mutual agreement of the State, the beneficiaries and their representatives and, given the gravity and delicacy of the situation, [are to be] implemented forthwith.” CONSIDERING THAT: 1. The State ratified the American Convention on July 31, 1973 and, pursuant to Article 62 of the Convention, recognized the contentious jurisdiction of the Court on June 21, 1985. 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. Article 25(1) of the Court’s 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. Article 1(1) of the Convention establishes the duty of 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. The purpose of provisional measures in domestic legal systems (domestic procedural law) in general, is to preserve the rights of the parties to a dispute, thereby ensuring that execution of the judgment on the merits is not obstructed or otherwise prejudiced by their actions pendente lite. 6. Under the International Law of Human Rights, urgent and provisional measures serve a further purpose, which is to protect fundamental human rights, thereby avoiding irreparable harm to persons. 7. The information presented by the Commission in this case reveals prima facie, a threat to the life and integrity of person of the members of the Kankuamo indigenous people. On a number of occasions, when protective measures were called for, this Court has ordered provisional measures applying the standard of prima facie assessment of a case and on the basis of presumptive evidence.1 1 Cf., inter alia, Matter of Gómez-Paquiyauri Brothers. Provisional Measures. Order of the InterAmerican Court of Human Rights of May 7, 2004, ‘Considering’ sixteen; Case of Bámaca-Velásquez. Provisional Measures. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of November 20, 2003, ‘Considering’ twelve, and Matter of Marta Colomina and Liliana Velásquez. Provisional Measures. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of September 8, 2003, ‘Considering’ five.