Director of Fundamental Rights of the Public Ministry,10 f) the Regional Command No. 2 – Detachment No. 28 – Second Company of the National Guard of San Juan de los Morros,11 and g) the Ombudsman.12 Some of these authorities even visited the Penitentiary, interviewed the criminal authorities, and realized the situation of indecision regarding Mr. Geurrero Larez. In this respect, a public criminal defender said that: The convicted did not appear in the penitentiary population of the establishment, therefore I interviewed the Sub-Director […] and the Secretary General […]. I also interviewed the Assistant Prosecutor 9 for Execution of the State of Guárico who maintained that an Inspection was made of the penitentiary population and of the convicted before identifying him as disappeared”13. 12. That, additionally, the Court warned and considered, regarding the adoption of the present Order, the weight of the time extension awarded by the Inter-American Commission, for which the State has not given a response to the urgent request for information issued on November 4, 2009, in the terms of Article XIV of the Inter-American Convention on the Forced Disappearance of Persons (supra Visto 2.c). As it has acted previously,14 the Tribunal emphasizes that it is vital that the State respond and offer information when the organs of the Inter-American System of Human Rights request it, in a way that the mechanisms of regional protection can function in an efficient manner. Such lack of an answer by the State permits the presumption that the request for urgent information has not produced the intended effect and that the situation of risk, which motivated the request still exists. 13. That it is important to recall that Article 1(1) of the Convention establishes the general obligation of the State Parties to respect the rights and liberties consecrated in it and to guarantee the free and full exercise to each person that is subject to its jurisdiction, which is imposed not only in the relationship of power of the State but also in the relationship with the actions of particular third parties. This Court has considered that the State holds a special position as guarantor with respect to persons deprived of liberty due to the fact that the penitentiary authorities have total control over them. Likewise, the Court has signaled that independently of the existence of specific provisional measures, the State is especially obligated to guarantee the rights of persons in circumstances regarding the deprivation of liberty.15 10 Cf. Request for Provisional Measures of November 13, 2009, the request of Mr. Guerrero Sanchez, received by the Board of Fundamental Rights of the Public Ministry on October 13, 2009, Appendix 13. 11 Cf. Request for Provisional Measures of November 13, 2009, charges of Mr. Guerrero Sanchez of September 8, 2009, and of Mrs. Hernandez Colmenarez of September 9, 2009, Appendixes 14 and 15. 12 Cf. Request for Provisional Measures of November 13, 2009, Act of the Office of the Ombudsman of the State of Guarico on September 10, 2009, Appendix 16. 13 Cf. Request for Provisional Measures of November 13, 2009, Appendix 7, Communication of the Public Defender No. 51 of the Metropolitan Area of Caracas. 14 Cf. Matter of A.J. et al., Provisional Measures regarding Haiti. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of September 21, 2009, Considering ninth. 15 Cf. Matter of Capital El Rodeo I & El Rodeo II Judicial Confinement Center, supra note 3, Considering 11; and Matter of the Mendoza Prisons. Provisional Measures regarding Argentina. Order of the President of the InterAmerican Court of Human Rights of August 22, 2007, Considering seventeenth.