defenders in Colombia and the proposed beneficiary’s membership in the CIJP, an organization whose members have remained in a situation of aggravated risk throughout the years; ii) the continuance of stalking, threats, and harassments aimed specifically at Mr. Danilo Rueda since 2002 to date, and iii) the gravity of the recent facts which reflect resurgence of the risk against Mr. Danilo Rueda. Therefore, the Commission considers that the facts at hand, taken as a whole and assessed in light of the serious context of risk faced by members of the CIJP and the situation faced by human rights defenders in Colombia, allow for the consideration, under the prima facie assessment standard, that human rights defender Danilo Rueda faces the highest level of risk;” b) in regard to the serious risk faced by members of the CIJP, “[a]fter an assessment of the nature of the attacks within the Colombian context itself, the Commission has considered that acts of aggression and harassment perpetrated against [them] result in a situation of imminent risk of irreparable harm to their rights, which has led to the granting of precautionary measures by the Commission, and whose duration has lasted more than 10 years given the persistence of the urgency, severity, and risk of irreparable harm;” c) the Commission “has exhausted all means within its reach to protect the members of the CIJP, including the mechanism of ‘increasing’ the precautionary measures and requesting that the State strengthen the measures of protection on behalf of Mr. Danilo Rueda. [Notwithstanding], Mr. Danilo Rueda has been a victim of continuous threats and harassment for more than 12 years and, in what has lapsed of 2014, at least 10 events have taken place that include direct death threats and seriously intimidating acts that have been addressed specifically at him. These circumstances show that the collective measures of protection have not been effective in dissuading and effectively protecting Mr. Danilo Rueda, who clearly faces an elevated risk and requires the adoption of individual measures of protection stemming from a serious and qualitative diagnostic of the risk he faces.” 6 In this sense, the State “has not adopted specific measures nor carried out an assessment on the adequacy and effectiveness of the measures in order to effectively protect Mr. Danilo Rueda from the risk he faces, given his specific circumstances. Specifically, it is the increase in the amount of risk –which now encompasses not only his workplace in Bogota, but also the places he visits, his home and that of his family members- which demonstrate that the adopted measures have not been effective […],” and d) “[t]he Commission understands that the intensification of the death threats and stalking he has undergone in 2014, given his defense work that may be considered particularly adverse to the interests of multiple actors in the armed 6 According to the Commission, “[s]pecifically regarding this point, it is necessary to discuss the effectiveness of the actions taken by the State to protect the proposed beneficiary. The Commission notes that in his capacity as member of the CIJP, Mr. Danilo Rueda has used the protection scheme for members of the CIJP. Given the collective nature of such a scheme, the measures have been subject to certain limitations due to their use by other members of the organization who are also at risk. This has meant that Mr. Danilo Rueda deals with situations where he is defenseless, and this has increased the perpetration of new threats and surveillance, particularly during his travels to other areas of the country where a protection scheme is not authorized. It is precisely at times of travel that Mr. Danilo Rueda faces a situation of extreme risk [...].” 5