hope[d] that the State w[ould] provide detailed and updated information on any progress in the investigations.” It reiterated its concern owing to the “omission of information concerning the investigation into the facts that gave rise to the provisional measures and into the alleged threats against Karen Fischer.” The Commission also emphasized "the lack of progress in the investigation into the harassment of the Mendez family in 2009.” In addition, it “observe[d] with concern that the State ha[d] indicated that it would be necessary for Mr. Méndez to file a criminal action, whereas the State had been made aware of the incident immediately.” Lastly, the Commission took note of the “security system implemented for the protection of the other beneficiaries.” Nevertheless, it indicated that “it was a matter of concern that [it] did not have any elements that [would] allow [it] to evaluate whether progress had been made in the investigations into the events that gave rise to the implementation of the provisional measures.” 22. Regarding the information provided by the State that it is investigating the facts denounced by CEJIL and some of the beneficiaries, the Court reiterates the State's obligation to investigate the facts as a measure to guarantee the rights to life and personal integrity. Despite this, in the context of these provisional measures, and as it has in other matters,6 the Court will not consider the effectiveness of the investigations, or the supposed negligence of the State in the investigations, because this is not part of the purpose of provisional measures. 5. Considerations of the Court concerning the pertinence of maintaining these provisional measures. 23. The Court recalls that Article 63(2) of the Convention requires that three conditions must be met for the Court to order provisional measures: (i) “extreme gravity,” (ii) “urgency,” and (iii) that the purpose is “to avoid irreparable damage” to persons. These three conditions are coexistent and must be present in every situation in which the Court’s intervention is requested. Similarly, these three conditions must persist for the Court to maintain the protection ordered. If one of them has ceased to be valid, the Court will assess the pertinence of continuing the protection ordered.7 24. In addition, this Court has indicated that, when ordering measures of protection, the Court or its President uses prima facie criteria in order to assess these requirements and, at times, it may be necessary to apply presumptions based on the needs for protection.8 However, maintaining the measures of protection requires the Court to make a more rigorous assessment as regards the persistence of the situation that gave rise to them.9 In 6 Cf. Matter of the Children and Adolescents deprived of liberty in the FEBEM “Tatuapé Complex.” Provisional measures with regard to Brazil. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of July 3, 2007, seventeenth considering paragraph, and Matter of Haitians and Dominicans of Haitian Origin in the Dominican Republic. Provisional measures with regard to Dominican Republic. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of September 7, 2012, sixth considering paragraph. 7 Cf. Case of Carpio Nicolle et al. Provisional measures with regard to Guatemala. Order of the InterAmerican Court of Human Rights of July 6, 2009, fourteenth considering paragraph, and Matter of Haitians and Dominicans of Haitian Origin in the Dominican Republic, supra, sixth considering paragraph. 8 Cf. Case of Raxcacó Reyes et al. Provisional measures with regard to Guatemala. Order of the InterAmerican Court of Human Rights of August 30, 2004, tenth considering paragraph, and Matter of Haitians and Dominicans of Haitian Origin in the Dominican Republic, supra, twenty-fifth considering paragraph. 9 Cf. Matter of the Kankuamo Indigenous People. Provisional measures with regard to Colombia. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of April 3, 2009, seventh considering paragraph, Matter of Haitians and Dominicans of Haitian Origin in the Dominican Republic, supra, twenty-fifth considering paragraph. 9