-13personal integrity are threatened and in grave danger. The standard for the prima facie assessment of a case and the application of presumptions in the face of the need for protection have led the President and the Court to order measures on different occasions.3 10. That the Court appreciates the cooperative attitude of the State that enabled María Leontina Millacura Llaipén and her two lawyers to appear before the public hearing held at the seat of the Court (supra Having seen paragraphs 5, 9, 10 and 14). The State indicated that this “should be interpreted in the context of the Argentine State’s traditional policy of cooperation with the Inter-American Court and Commission.” 11. That, with regard to the request for the expansion of the measures requested by the representatives during the public hearing, in favor of the granddaughters of María Millacura Llaipén (daughters of Marcos and Valeria Torres), of Marcela (“wife of Marcos Torres”), of Alberto and Noelia Hayes (father and sister of David Hayes) and of Luis Alberto Gajardo (witness), the Court considers that their life and personal integrity should also be protected by provisional measures, for the reasons indicated in the eighth and ninth considering paragraphs of this Order, because these persons are also in a situation of danger. 12. That, regarding the expansion of measures in favor of Miguel Ángel Gallardo, requested by the representatives during the public hearing, the Court considers that the representatives should justify this request in writing. 13. That, during the public hearing, the representatives also indicated that there were other individuals for whom they “could request the Court to provide protection, but whose situation is unknown.” They stated that these persons were Diego Álvarez, Mauricio Agüero and Cristian Gamín, “friends and witnesses in the case of Iván” Torres. If the representatives consider that those persons should be protected by provisional measures, they can present a duly justified request in writing. 14. That, regarding the representatives’ request (supra Having seen paragraphs 5(b) and 17(e)), to the effect that the provisional measures should be expanded in favor of Iván Eladio Torres, in order to protect his life and physical integrity, the Court considers that this request is not admissible, because it relates to a matter that is the object of a case before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights regarding his alleged forced disappearance. However, the Court expresses its concern in view of the failure to determine the whereabouts of Iván Eladio Torres, who allegedly disappeared approximately two years and nine months ago. 15. That the Court has taken note of the information provided by the Commission regarding Luis Alberto Alcaína, in reply to the Court’s request in the Order of June 21, 2006 (supra Having seen paragraphs 4 and 6). To date, neither the Commission nor the representatives have justified a request for measures in favor of Mr. Alcaína. Nevertheless, owing to his connection to the events of April 23, 2006 (supra Having 3 Cf. Matter of Yare I and Yare II Capital Region Penitentiary Center. Provisional measures. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of March 30, 2006, twentieth considering paragraph; Matter of the Monagas Judicial Confinement Center (“La Pica”). Urgent Measures. Order of the President of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of January 13, 2006, sixteenth considering paragraph; and Matter of Children Deprived of Liberty in the “Complexo do Tatuapé” of FEBEM. Provisional measures. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of November 30, 2005, twenty-second considering paragraph.