CHAPTER 2. THE FACTUAL CONSIDERATIONS GIVING RISE TO THIS REQUEST 6. The Court’s case law considers that an advisory opinion must have a practical effect in inter-American law. Thus, it has indicated that: “[T]he advisory jurisdiction of the Court is “an alternative judicial method” (Restrictions to the Death Penalty (Arts. 4(2) and 4(4) American Convention on Human Rights), Advisory Opinion OC-3/83 of September 8, 1983. Series A No. 3, para. 43) for the protection of internationally recognized human rights, which shows that this jurisdiction should not, in principle, be used for purely academic speculation, without a foreseeable application to concrete situations justifying the need for an advisory opinion.” 1 Bearing this in mind, we will refer to actual situations that demonstrate the specific usefulness and importance of obtaining a response to this request. 2 7. The situation that has led Colombia to present this request for an advisory opinion relates to the severe degradation of the human and marine environment of the Wider Caribbean Region that may result from the acts and/or omissions of States with coasts on the Caribbean Sea in the context of the construction of major new infrastructure projects. 8. In particular, this request for an advisory opinion responds to the development of major new infrastructure projects in the Wider Caribbean Region that, owing to their dimensions and permanence in time, could cause significant ham to the marine environment and, consequently, to the inhabitants of the coastal areas and islands located in this region, who depend on this environment for their subsistence and development. As an example, we will include some considerations on the possible risks of pollution entailed by the execution of these projects and the implications for the marine environment of the Wider Caribbean Region and, hence, for the quality of life, personal integrity and development of the inhabitants of the region with the sole purpose that the Court may issue its opinion with regard to the scope and application of certain provisions of the Pact of San José and of any other treaties that the Court finds it pertinent to analyze. 9. It is evident that this problem is of interest not only to the States of the Wider Caribbean Region whose coastal and insular population may be directly affected by the environmental damage suffered by this region, but also to the international community. This is because we are living at a time when major infrastructure projects are frequently being built and brought into operation in maritime zones with effects that may exceed State boundaries, and that may end up having negative repercussions on the quality of life and personal integrity of those who depend on the marine environment for their subsistence and development. 1 ICourtHR, Judicial Guarantees in States of Emergency (Arts. 27.2, 25 and 8 American Convention on Human Rights), Advisory Opinion OC-9/87 of October 6, 1987. Series A No. 9. Para. 16. 2 ICourtHR, Judicial Guarantees in States of Emergency (Arts. 27.2, 25 and 8 American Convention on Human Rights), Advisory Opinion OC-9/87 of October 6, 1987. Series A No. 9. Para. 17. 21