11 34. That as indicated, following the instructions from the Presidency, this Secretariat requested the representatives, the Commission and the State in their corresponding communications (supra Having Seen clauses 9 and 10), that they indicate the present status of each beneficiary of the present measures in a detailed manner in order to determine whether the extreme gravity and urgency and the need to avoid irreparable damage to the beneficiaries’ rights still persist. In view of this request, the representatives, the Commission and the State submitted the information described below. 35. That in relation to Viviana Salvatierra, the representatives indicated that the beneficiary expressed that the security measures in her favor were never implemented and that she stopped working at the Myrna Mack Foundation in 2002; as regards América Morales Ruiz, in charge of the Foundation’s Documentation Center, the representatives indicated that the intimidation and threats giving rise to the provisional measures were not repeated. Consequently, they estimated that the security measures in relation to these two beneficiaries could be left without effect. In turn, the Commission considered that the reasons giving rise to the provisional measures in favor of Mrs. Salvatierra and Mrs. Morales no longer persist, and the State has not given an opinion specifically about these two beneficiaries. 36. That as expressed by the representatives and the Commission, this Tribunal deems it pertinent to lift the measures in favor of Viviana Salvatierra and América Morales Ruiz. 37. That as regards Iduvina Hernández, the representatives considered that it was necessary to reestablish the measures in her favor as perimetral security in her workplace at the organization Seguridad en Democracia (SEDEM) since Iduvina Hernández has been the victim of some intimidatory acts. As indicated by Mrs. Hernández, her residence was broken into on June 24, 2007 and the vehicle inside her property was forced open and some objects were stolen. The Commission observed that the State has not provided any updated information about the status of this beneficiary so it considered it necessary to maintain the measures ordered in her favor. It must be pointed out that the State has not given any specific opinion about this beneficiary. 38. That as regards Mrs. Iduvina Hernández this Court observes that, on the basis of the information provided by the representatives and by the Commission it does not result that the facts that occurred on June 24, 2007 are related to the object of these provisional measures. Therefore, this Tribunal deems it pertinent to lift the measures in her favor. 39. That in view of the previous clauses (supra Considering clauses 34 to 38) it results that since the enforcement of the present provisional measures no incidents directly related to the object of the present measures have been proven. Hence, the Court considers it reasonable to suppose that the situation regarding such beneficiaries is no longer within the framework of the assumptions pointed out in Article 63(2) of the Convention. Venezuela. Order of the Court of August 5, 2008, Considering clause 3, and Matter of Leonel Rivero et al., supra note 4, Considering clause 16.