Article 63(2) of convention deals with so called provisional measures. It authorizes the issuance of temporary restraining orders. It provides provisional measures in Inter-American Human Rights system. It provides that “in case of extreme gravity and urgency and when necessary to avoid irreparable damage to person, the court shall adopt such provisional measures as it deems pertinent in matter it has under consideration with respect to case not yet submitted to court, it may act at the request of commission.” The court may act on its own motion or by request of one of parties. Provisional measures may be granted in second category of cases at request of commission.

The court has number of jurisdictions. Article 62 of convention provides court contentious jurisdiction- (a) The state party may upon depositing its instrument of ratification or adherence to its convention. (b) Such declaration may make unconditionally on the condition of reciprocity, for specified cases. (c) The jurisdiction of court shall comprise all cases concerning the interpretation and application of provision of this convention that is submitted to it provided that the state parties to the cases have recognized such jurisdiction. The court has power to hear any challenges to its jurisdiction based on non-compliance by commission with procedures set out in Article 48 to 50 of convention. Article 67 of convention provides that “the judgment rendered by the court is final and not subject to appeal.” Another jurisdiction is “advisory jurisdiction” which is very broad.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

Article 64 of convention provides this power. The member state of organization may consult the court regarding the interpretation of this convention or treaties concerning the protection of human rights in American state. The court at the request of member’s state of organization may provide that state with opinion regarding compatibility of domestic jurisdiction. The court advisory jurisdiction has number of advisory opinions concerning the protection of human rights in American States. Article 64(2) the court is also empowered at request of any member states of OAS, to render advisory opinion determining whether the state domestic laws are compatible with the convention and court has held to satisfy the requirement that advisory opinion request fall within the “sphere of competence.”