8 a case and application of presumptions regarding the need for protection have led the Court several times to order provisional measures.7 14. In view of the above, the Court deems that the measures adopted by the President in his August 3, 2004 Order (supra Having Seen 5) must remain in force, for which reason it ratifies that Order to its full extent. 15. The case that the Commission’s request refers to is not being heard by the Court regarding the merits, and therefore adoption of provisional measures does not involve a decision on the merits of the dispute between the petitioners and the State. By adopting provisional measures, the Court is merely ensuring that it can fully exercise its mandate pursuant to the Convention in cases of extreme gravity and urgency that require measures of protection to avoid irreparable damages to persons.8 16. On August 30, 2004 the State filed a brief in which it forwarded information regarding the measures ordered by the President. According to the State, the information supplied consists of “the literal transcript of the reply sent by the Public Prosecutor’s Office of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela [regarding] the Provisional Measures adopted in the Matter of ‘Globovisión’ Television Station.” 17. On September 3, 2004 the State filed two briefs in which it reported on the measures adopted in the Matter of “Globovisión” Television Station (supra Having Seen 7). 18. With respect to the measures to protect the lives, safety, and freedom of expression, as well as to protect the head offices of Globovisión, the State pointed out in said briefs (supra Having Seen 6 and 7) that in 2002 “[m]easures of protection were ordered” to protect the lives and safety “of the workers, journalists, and technicians” of said channel, as well as “the facilities where the head offices of said broadcaster operate, and the microwave retransmission antennae that it uses. Security bodies such as the Metropolitan Police, the Caracas Police and the National Guard were designated to carry out said measures of protection.” The State also pointed out that on March 5, 2004 the Fourth Court with oversight functions in the Criminal Court Circuit of the State of Carabobo “ordered Protective Measures” in favor of [Janeth Carrasquilla], instructing the Police of the [S]tate of Carabobo to carry out said measures.” According to the State, said measure of protection is in force, even though Mrs. Carrasquilla “has not appeared before the Public Prosecutor’s Office to state that it is not being fulfilled.” The State also indicated that on May 4, 2004 the Sixty-eighth Prosecutor of the Public Prosecutor’s Office of the Judicial Circumscription of the Metropolitan Area of Caracas was appointed to “process the extension” of the precautionary measures ordered by the InterAmerican Commission in favor of the employees, property and facilities of the Globovisión television channel, and that, on May 6, 2004 the Thirty-third Court with oversight functions in the Criminal Court Circuit of the Metropolitan Area of Caracas, “ratified the measures adopted before.” 7 See Case of Raxcacó-Reyes. Provisional Measures. August 30, 2004 Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Whereas ten; Matter of Carlos Nieto, supra note 6, Whereas seven; and Matter of “El Nacional” and “Así es la Noticia” Newspapers, supra note 2, Whereas seven. 8 See Case of Raxcacó-Reyes, supra note 7, Whereas eleven; Matter of Carlos Nieto et al., supra note 6, Whereas ten; and Matter of “El Nacional” and “Así es la Noticia” Newspapers, supra note 2, Whereas thirteen.