4 5. That article 1(1) of the Convention establishes the obligation of the States Parties to respect the rights and freedoms recognized therein and to ensure to all persons subject to their jurisdiction the free and full exercise of those rights and freedoms. 6. That the facts presented by the representatives of the alleged victim's next of kin (supra sixth having seen paragraph) reveal the existence of a situation of extreme gravity and urgency for the life and safety of the next of kin of Myrna Mack Chang: Zoila Esperanza Chang Lau (mother); Marco Antonio Mack Chang (brother); Freddy Mack Chang (brother); Vivian Mack Chang (sister); Ronnie Mack Apuy (cousin); Lucrecia Hernández Mack (daughter) and the latter's children, which justify the adoption of provisional measures in their favour. 7. That, from the statements made by the expert witness, Iduvina Hernández, during the public hearing (supra fifth having seen paragraph), it is clear that she may be subject to reprisals as a result of her testimony before this Court. 8. That, in other cases, the Court has ordered provisional measures to protect witnesses who have testified before it2; likewise it is appropriate to order them in favor of the expert witnesses who have presented their reports to the Court; accordingly, it is necessary to adopt measures of protection to avoid irreparable damage to Iduvina Hernández. 9. That it is the responsibility of the State to adopt safety measures to protect all those persons who are subject to its jurisdiction and that this obligation is even more evident in relation to those who are participating in proceedings before the organs of protection of the American Convention. 10. That, in general, under domestic legal systems (internal procedural law), the purpose of provisional measure is to protect the rights of the parties in dispute, ensuring that the judgment on merits is not prejudiced by their actions pendente lite. 11. That, under international human rights law, the purpose of urgent and provisional measures goes further, because, in addition to their essentially preventive nature, they protect fundamental rights, inasmuch as they seek to avoid irreparable damage to persons. Provisional Measures. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of November 21, 2000. Series E No. 3, fourth considering paragraph; the Constitutional Court case. Provisional Measures. Order of the President of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of April 7, 2000. Series E No. 2, fourth considering paragraph; and Velásquez Rodríguez, Fairén Garbi and Solís Corrales, and Godínez Cruz cases. Provisional Measures. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of January 15, 1988. Series E No. 1, fourth and fifth considering paragraphs. 2 Cf., inter alia, Paniagua Morales et al. case. Provisional Measures. Order of the President of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of January 29, 2001. Series E No. 3; Case of Haitians and Dominicans of Haitian Origin in the Dominican Republic. Provisional Measures. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of August 18, 2000. Series E No. 3; Bámaca Velásquez case. Provisional Measures. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of August 29, 1998. Series E No. 2; Bámaca Velásquez case. Provisional Measures. Order of the President of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of June 30, 1998. Series E No. 2; Blake case. Provisional Measures. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of April 18, 1997. Series E No. 2; Blake case. Provisional Measures. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of September 22, 1995. Series E No. 1; Caballero Delgado and Santana case. Provisional Measures. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of December 7, 1994. Series E No. 1; and Velásquez Rodríguez, Fairén Garbi and Solís Corrales, and Godínez Cruz cases. Provisional Measures. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of January 15, 1988. Series E No. 1.