ORDER OF THE INTER-AMERICAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS OF OCTOBER 25, 2012 PROVISIONAL MEASURES WITH REGARD TO GUATEMALA CASE OF CARPIO NICOLLE ET AL. HAVING SEEN: 1. The Orders of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the InterAmerican Court” or “the Court”) of June 4, 1995, September 10, 1996, September 19, 1997, June 19, and November 27, 1998, September 30, 1999, September 5, 2001, July 8, 2004, and July 6, 2009. In the last Order, the Court decided, inter alia: 1. To call upon the State to maintain and adopt such measures as may be necessary to continue protecting the life and personal integrity of Karen Fischer, Daniela Carpio Fischer, Rodrigo Carpio Fischer, Martha Arrivillaga de Carpio, Jorge Carpio Arrivillaga and Rodrigo Carpio Arrivillaga, and Abraham Méndez García, his wife and children […]; 2. To call upon the State to forward the Court the report mentioned in considering paragraph 31 of th[e] Order, as well as information on the implementation of the measures […];1 3. To call upon the beneficiaries’ representatives and the Inter-American Commission to submit any observations they deem relevant on the report mentioned in the preceding operative paragraph within four weeks of receiving the said report […], and 4. To remind the State that it must continue allowing the beneficiaries to participate in the planning and implementing of the protective measures and, in general, keep them informed of any progress made in the said measures. 2. The briefs of November 2, 2009, July 18, September 22 and December 14, 2010, April 4, 2011, and February 20, 2012, in which the Republic of Guatemala provided its reports on implementation of the provisional measures 3. The briefs of December 18, 2009, August 23 and October 28, 2010, February 9, April 1 and May 31, 2011, and April 2, 2012, and their attachments, in which the Center for Justice and International Law (CEJIL) forwarded its observations on the State’s reports on compliance. 1 The Court ordered the State to present “a report in which it: (a) identifies and establishes differences in the risk level of each person mentioned in the preceding considering paragraph; (b) carefully assesses each individual situation, the existence, characteristics, and origin or source of the risk, and (c) defines in a timely manner the specific means and measures of protection that are adequate and sufficient to avoid the risk, if it exists, from materializing.”