4 CONSIDERING THAT: 1. The Dominican Republic has been a State Party to the American Convention since April 19, 1978, and, pursuant to Article 62 thereof, it accepted the Court’s compulsory jurisdiction on March 25, 1999. 2. Article 63(2) of the American Convention stipulates that: In 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. According to Article 27 of the Court’s Rules of Procedure:2 1. At any stage of proceedings involving cases of extreme gravity and urgency, and when necessary to avoid irreparable damage to persons, the Court may, on its own motion, order such provisional measures as it deems appropriate, pursuant to Article 63(2) of the Convention. […] 3. In contentious cases before the Court, victims or alleged victims, or their representatives, may submit to it a request for provisional measures, which must be related to the subject matter of the case. […] 5. The Court, or if the Court is not sitting, the Presidency, upon considering that it is possible and necessary, may require the State, the Commission, or the representatives of the beneficiaries to provide information on a request for provisional measures before deciding on the measure requested. […] 4. The provision established in Article 63(2) of the Convention confers an obligatory nature on the State’s adoption of the provisional measures ordered by this Court, because a basic principle of international law, supported by international case law, has indicated that States shall comply with their convention obligations in good faith (pacta sunt servanda).3 5. Under international human rights law, provisional measures are not only preventive, in the sense that they preserve a juridical situation, but they are also fundamentally protective, because they protect human rights inasmuch as they seek to avoid irreparable damage to persons. The measures are applicable provided that the basic requirements of extreme gravity and urgency to prevent irreparable damage to persons are met. Thus, provisional measures become a real jurisdictional guarantee of a preventive nature.4 6. Article 63(2) of the Convention requires that, for the Court to order provisional measures three conditions must be met: (i) “extreme gravity”; (ii) “urgency,” and (iii) that their purpose is to “avoid irreparable damage to persons.” These three conditions 2 The Court’s Rules of Procedure approved on November 24, 2009, during its eighty-fifth regular session held from November 16 to 28, 2009, and in force as of January 1, 2010. 3 Cf. Matter of James et al. Provisional measures with regard to Trinidad and Tobago. Order of the Court of June 14, 1998, sixth considering paragraph; Matter of the El Rodeo I and El Rodeo II Capital Judicial Detention Center. Provisional measures with regard to Venezuela. Order of the Court of July 6, 2011, third considering paragraph, and Matter of the Monagas Judicial Detention Center ("La Pica"). Provisional measures with regard to Venezuela. Order of the Court of July 6, 2011, third considering paragraph. 4 Cf. Case of the “La Nación” Newspaper. Provisional measures with regard to Costa Rica. Order of the Court of September 7, 2001, fourth considering paragraph; Case of Rosendo Cantú et al. Provisional measures with regard to Mexico. Order of the Court of July 1, 2011, fourth considering paragraph, and Case of Kawas Fernández. Provisional measures with regard to Honduras. Order of the Court of July 5, 2011, fifth considering paragraph.