3 These orders imply a special duty to protect the beneficiaries of the measures, as long as they are in force, and any breach thereto may trigger international liability on the part of the State.3 4. According to international human rights law, provisional measures have both a precautionary and a fundamentally tutelary character inasmuch as they protect human rights while also seeking to avoid irreparable harm to persons. The measures may be applied only when three basic requirements are fulfilled: extreme gravity, urgency, and necessity for the prevention of irreparable harm to persons. In this way, provisional measures become a true jurisdictional guarantee of a preventive nature.4 5. In the exercise of its authority with respect to provisional measures, the Court shall only give due consideration to arguments that are strictly and directly related to the requirements of extreme gravity, urgency, and the prevention of irreparable harm to persons. Thus, when deciding whether to maintain provisional measures in effect, the Tribunal must analyze if the situation of extreme gravity and urgency that prompted the initial granting of the measures persists, or examine whether new circumstances equally as grave and urgent call for the measures’ continued enforcement. Any other matter may only be put before the Court by way of presenting a contentious case.5 * * * 6. In accordance with Order of the Court of July 8, 2009, the State must, inter alia, adopt the provisional measures necessary in order to protect the right to life and personal integrity of: (i) Wilmar Rodríguez Quintero, Yimmy Efraín Rodríguez Quintero, Nubia Saravia, Karen Dayana Rodríguez Saravia, Valeria Rodríguez Saravia, William Rodríguez Quintero, (ii) Sandra Belinda Montero Fuentes, Juan Manuel Ayala Montero and María Paola Casanova Montero, as well as Salomón Flórez Contrera, Luis José Pundor Quinter, and their respective next of kin. 1. Regarding the situation of the beneficiaries Yimmy, Wilmar, and William Rodríguez Quintero and their families Reyes et al. Provisional Measures regarding Mexico. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of May 26, 2010, Considering clause five; and, Matter of the Forensic Anthropology Foundation. Provisional Measures regarding Guatemala. Order of the President of the Court of July 21, 2010, Considering clause four. 3 Cf. Case of Hilaire, Constantine, Benjamin, et al. v. Trinidad and Tobago. Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of June 21, 2002. Series C No. 94, paras. 196-200; Matter of the Mendoza Prisons. Provisional Measures regarding Argentina. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of March 30, 2006, Considering clause ten; and, Case of the 19 Tradesmen v. Colombia. Monitoring Compliance with Judgment and Provisional Measures regarding Colombia. Order of the Inter-Amerian Court of Human Rights of July 8, 2009, Considering clause ninety. 4 Cf. Case of “La Nación” Newspaper. Provisional Measures regarding Costa Rica. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of September 7, 2001, Considering clause four; Matter of Alvarado Reyes et al., Provisional Measures regarding Mexico, supra note 2, Considering clause four; and, Matter of the Forensic Anthropology Foundation, supra note 2, Considering clause five. 5 Matter of James et al. Provisional Measures regarding Trinidad and Tobago. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of August 29, 1998, Considering clause six; Matter of Juan Almonte Herrera et al. Provisional Measures regarding the Dominican Republic. Order of the InterAmerican Court of Human Rights of May 25, 2010, Considering clause six; and, Case of the Caracazo. Provisional Measures regarding Venezuela. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of May 28, 2010, Considering clause seven.