4 c. with regard to Antonio Sension, that the Dominican State ensure adequate resources so that he may conduct an exhaustive search for his family in Haiti and in the Dominican Republic. d. to establish a high-level committee to coordinate and monitor the implementation of all the above-mentioned measures. Lastly, with regard to Father Pedro Ruquoy and Solange Pierre, the Commission indicated that “the Government has not issued a declaration asserting the legitimacy of [their] participation [...] in case No. 12,271”, nor has it taken any measure to investigate and punish the verbal and physical attacks that they have both suffered. CONSIDERING: 1. That the Dominican Republic has been a State Party to the American Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter “the American Convention” or “the Convention”) since April 19, 1978, and recognized the jurisdiction of the Court, pursuant to Article 62 of the Convention, on March 25, 1999. 2. That Article 63(2) of the American Convention establishes that, in cases of “extreme gravity and urgency, and when necessary to avoid irreparable damage to persons”, the Court may, in matters not yet submitted to its consideration, adopt such provisional measures as it deems pertinent, at the request of the Commission. 3. That, according to Article 25(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court: At 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. That Article 1(1) of the Convention indicates the obligation 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. That the information submitted by the Commission shows prima facie that the situation of “extreme gravity and urgency” subsists with regard to the rights to life, to humane treatment, to the special protection of the child by its family, and to the freedom of movement and residence of the beneficiaries of these measures. 6. That, in general, the purpose of provisional measures, under national legal systems (internal procedural law) is to preserve the rights of the parties to a dispute, ensuring that the future judgment on merits will not be prejudiced by their actions pendente lite. 7. That the purpose of provisional measures in international human rights law goes further, because, in addition to their essentially preventive nature, they effectively protect fundamental rights, since they seek to avoid irreparable damage to persons. 8. That it is the responsibility of the Dominican Republic to adopt effective safety measures to protect all the persons who are subject to its jurisdiction; this obligation