9 not been reported to the competent authority, and that there is only one report filed by the beneficiary with the Prosecutor’s Office for Administrative Crime, against the members of Patrol PCN-11-066. Furthermore, the State affirmed that in compliance with its constitutional and conventional duties, the State requested that the National Civil Police provide perimetral protection during the peaceful protest of Mr. Lemus Alvarado at the Civic Center, 7a, Avenue 27, Zone 1 of Guatemala City. To that end, the State requested that the Court lift and file the measures in favor of Mr. Lemus Alvarado. In its brief of July 15, 2008 the State indicated that, in relation to the security of beneficiary Lemus Alvarado, the Foundation had expressed that the security measures were being complied with satisfactorily. It must be pointed out that the State has not given a specific opinion on the measures adopted for each one of the relatives of Mr. Lemus Alvarado, as required in the Secretariat’s note of July 18, 2008 (supra Having Seen clause 10). 27. That as regards beneficiary Jorge Guillermo Lemus Alvarado and each one of his relatives protected by the measures, the Court observes that the representatives have only reproduced the allegations expressed by the beneficiary without making any type of evaluation about such matter. Due to the above, this Tribunal considers that, on the basis of the alleged facts described by Mr. Lemus Alvarado so far it does not result that they are in direct relation to the reasons why the provisional measures in favor of Mr. Lemus Alvarado and his relatives were granted. Due to the above, the Court estimates that on the basis of the information provided by the representatives, in view of the specific request by the Secretariat (supra Having Seen clause 9), there has been no case of extreme gravity or urgency representing an imminent risk at present; therefore, the representatives and the Commission are once again required to provide clear and accurate information evidencing the extreme gravity and urgency representing an imminent risk and that it is directly related to the facts giving rise to granting the measures, in order to evaluate the pertinence of maintaining the measures in favor of such beneficiary and each one of his relatives. Likewise, the State is required to provide detailed information about the facts supposedly alleged by the beneficiary and the observations deemed pertinent. * * * 28. That due to the lack of information regarding the present situation of extreme gravity and urgency, the Tribunal considers it pertinent to maintain the provisional measures for an additional period of at least six months, in favor of Helen Mack Chang; each one of the relatives of Mrs. Mack Chang, i.e.: Zolia Esperanza Chang Lau, Marco Antonio Mack Chang, Freddy Mack Chang, Vivian Mack Chang, Ronald Chang Apuy, Lucrecia Hernández Mack and her children, as well as the other members of the Foundation. Likewise, regarding beneficiaries Luis Roberto Romero Rivera, Jorge Guillermo Lemus Alvarado and his relatives. 29. That the State as well as the beneficiaries of such measures and/or their representatives and the Commission have the duty to submit reports and observations related to compliance with the provisional measures; therefore, such parties must present the information in a clear, complete and specific manner for the Tribunal to have the necessary elements to assess the present status of the provisional measures.