e) CEJIL advised that, in March 2011, while Abraham Mendez was walking in the residential area where he lives in the early hours of the morning, he passed a man sitting on a swing, accompanied by a bulldog. The animal immediately set upon him three times; consequently, Mr. Mendez told the owner that the animal was dangerous before continuing on his way. When the beneficiary was about to reach the bus stop to go to the city center, he realized that the same unknown man had followed him in, a car and when he reached Mr. Mendez, he addressed him and told him that "in Guate, judges die,” and f) On October 19, 2012, Abraham Méndez advised that he had been subjected to “threats and similar acts to those that occurred in 2010, 2011 and 2012, consisting in telephone calls that jeopardized [his] vulnerable situation,” as well as that “of his sons and his wife; in other words, the family circle; to the extent that, in 2012, he had suffered another threat; in that case one that sought to underline his wife’s vulnerability.” He added that the State had assumed an “irresponsible and indifferent attitude” with regard to his situation. He indicated that he “consider[ed] it essential to maintain the provisional measures issued for himself and his family in force, especially now that the proceedings have been opened during which the murder of Jorge Carpio Nicolle and his companions will be investigated, which increases [his] vulnerability.” 15. CEJIL argued that Abraham Mendez had indicated that, owing to the reopening of the case in which he acted as prosecutor he “had been stigmatized and followed.” In addition, it alleged that the State had “not indicated or provided any elements that would reveal that it had determined and assessed the level, characteristics and origin of the risk” to the beneficiaries and that, “in addition, it has not referred to the reopening of the criminal proceeding and the media coverage that this has received, or the way in which this could affect the safety of the beneficiaries.” It declared that “it is scarcely conceivable that the measures of protection indicated by the State constitute an adequate protection system” for the beneficiaries. It added that “while the source of the risk has not been identified, the situation of insecurity remains in which they are and may be victims of new threats.” CEJIL emphasized that both the wife of Mr. Mendez and their five minor children are subject to the same risk factors as he is. 16. The State reported that the alleged “lack of grounds for the risk assessments [had been] forwarded to those in charge of making the risk assessments, and the Ministry of the Interior had been asked to provide the criteria, parameters and indicators taken into account in the analysis made of the beneficiaries’ situation, namely: (a) level of risk; (b) recent threats suffered by some beneficiaries; (c) stage of the criminal proceedings; (d) those possibly indicted in the case, and (e) possibility of reprisals against the beneficiaries.” It underscored that “there have been no changes in the situation of the beneficiaries” and that “the situation has continued normally with no evidence of increased risk.” It stressed that it “hopes that [its] compliance with the provisional measures to provide protection to the beneficiaries is noted.” It indicated that “the investigations have not yet determined who is responsible for the telephone calls received with death threats against Karen Fischer. Also, that “even though [it] has the obligation to investigate the facts brought to its attention regarding the incidents that the beneficiaries have experienced, it is also true that the latter [must] prove […] the factors based on which they consider that their personal integrity remains in circumstances of extreme gravity and urgency.” 17. The Commission reiterated that “it should not be assumed that the absence of recent threats to most of the beneficiaries implies that the situation of risk has disappeared.” It considered that “the measures adopted could have contributed to the protection of 7