-7- 10. The brief of December 16, 2005, whereby the Commission, after a delay granted it by the President up to November 28, 2005 and after a note from the Secretariat reminding the expiration of such delay, filed its observations about the desistment from the security measures on the part of the beneficiary and pointed out that: a) it contacted the representatives, State officials responsible for supervising compliance with the provisional measures and the beneficiaries of the aforesaid measures. The beneficiaries provided information that, in view of its nature, had to be put down in writing in order to be transmitted to the Court. Such information was not forwarded; b) on October 17, 2005, in the course of a hearing on the implementation of the recommendations by the Comisión de la Verdad y Reconciliación en el Perú (CVR) (Commission for Truth and Reconciliation in Peru) held at the Inter-American Commission, other organizations reported that, as human rights violations which occurred during the internal armed conflict were being taken to court for trial, serious threats to witnesses were taking place, and they produced a list of 47 cases of threats and other acts of harassment wherein, among others, that of Mr. Luis Alberto Ramírez-Hinostroza stands out; c) in the telephone conversation with Mr. Ramírez-Hinostroza on October 17, 2005, the latter expressed that he was “grateful that he had been afforded the protection measures that save his life and that of his family and that he was interested to continue under the protection thereof.” Mr. RamírezHinostroza pointed out that “he was dissatisfied [with] the way the State had been providing him with the security measures, specifically because he had not been given a vehicle for his conveyance, nor financial resources for his subsistence and that of his family.” Regarding this, he expressly pointed out “[I] am a witness and the State does not take me in charge”; d) information was received that on Sunday November 20, 2005 Mr. Ramírez would have tried to take his own life; and e) the persons from the State, as well as those from civil society, who were interviewed, and the Commission too, coincide in that the provisional measures in favor of Luis Alberto Ramírez-Hinostroza and others have to be maintained. It furthermore prayed the Court to grant the Commission a reasonable time to complete the necessary information in order to offer the Tribunal a duly documented opinion. 11. The notes of December 20, 2005 and January 12, 2006, by means of which the Secretariat, following instructions by the President, informed the Commission that it could forward to the Tribunal the aforementioned additional information (supra Having Seen clause Number 10 f), as soon as it had it. 12. The brief of February 1, 2006, whereby the State filed the first one of the reports it has to produce every two months on its compliance with the measures, in response to the provisions by the Court in the sixth operative paragraph contained in