13 In l1ght of the foregoing, the Court has satisfied Itself that, prima facie, it has jurisdiction to deal with the appllcat1on IV. On the provisional measures sought 14 In the1r Application, the Applicants did not request the Court to order provisional measures, 15. Under Article 27(2) of the Protocol and Rule 51(1) of the Rules , the Court Is empowered to order provisional measures proprio motu in cases of extreme grav1ty and when necessary to avoid irreparable harm to persons, and which it deems necessary to adopt in the interest of the parties or of justice 16 It is for the Court to decide In each situation if, In the light of the particular circumstances, it should make use of the power provided for by the aforementioned provisions, 17 The Applicant is on death row and It appears from this application that there exists a situation of extreme gravity, as well as a risk of irreparable harm to the Applicant: 18. Given the particular circumstances of the case, where there Is a risk of the execution of the death sentence, which may jeopardise the enjoyment of the lights guaranteed under Articles 7 of the Charter and 14 of the ICCPR, the Court has decided to Invoke its powers under Article 27{2) aforesaid, 19 The Court finds that the situation raised in the present application is of extreme gravity, and represents a risk of irreparable harm to the rights of the Applicants as protected by Article 7 of the Charter and 14 of the ICCPR, if the death sentence were to be carried out. 20. Consequently , the Court concludes that the circumstances require an Order for provisional measures, in accordance with Article 27(2) of the Protocol and Rule 51 of its Rules, to preserve the status quo ante, pending the determination of the main application. 21 For the avoidance of doubt, this Order shall not in any way prejudice any final findings the Court shall make regarding its jurisdiction, the admissibility and the ments of the application. 5