6 Foundation for an additional term of six months. It also made reference to the manner in which said measures were implemented. 12. That in its observations, the representatives pointed out that, with regard to the adoption of measures in favor of Helen Mack and her next of kin, among which Ronald Chang-Apuy is included, and also of the other members of the Myrna Mack Foundation, on March 12, 2009, there was a meeting between officials of the COPREDEH (Comisión Presidencial Coordinadora de la Política del Ejecutivo en Materia de Derechos Humanos) [Presidential Coordinating Commission of the Executive Policy on Human Rights] and the Ministerio de Gobernación [Ministry of Internal Affairs and Security], in Order to assess the existing risk with regard to the beneficiaries of the provisional measures. On the matter, they repeated what the State had indicated regarding the risk situation derived from the work developed by Mrs. Helen Mack. Consequently, they requested the Court to maintain the provisional measures in favor of Mrs. Helen Mack, her next of kin and the personnel of the Myrna Mack Foundation in the manner agreed upon with the State. 13. That the Inter-American Commission, through briefs of May 12 and September 9, 2009, pointed out that “the information given by the beneficiaries and the lack of advances in matters of […] punishment to the responsible for these facts, motivate the permanence of these provisional measures.” * * * 14. That the Court considers it convenient to repeat that provisional measures have an exceptional character, they are ordered in accordance with the need of protection and, once they are Ordered, they must be maintained provided the Court considers that the basic requirements of extreme gravity and urgency and the prevention of irreparable damage to the rights of the persons they protect still persist.11 15. That with regard to Mrs. Helen Mack, her next of kin and the members of the Myrna Mack Foundation, the Court notices, from the information provided by the parties, that the provisional measures have been complied with in the manner agreed upon by means of the agreement signed on March 12, 2009 (supra Considering 9). Furthermore, the Court takes cognizance that the State, in coordination with the representatives, performed risk assessments upon the beneficiaries of the provisional measures, assessments which determined the risk level regarding the safety of the above mentioned persons and of the members of the Foundation. 16. That based on the information and the observations submitted by the parties regarding the present status of the situation of extreme gravity and urgency, the Court considers it pertinent to keep the provisional measures in force in favor of Helen Mack-Chang; of each one of the next of kin of Mrs. Mack-Chang, to wit: Zolia 11 Cf. Case of the Constitutional Court. Provisional Measures regarding Peru. Order of the Court of March 14, 2001, Considering clause 3; Matter of Carlos Nieto-Palma et al. Provisional Measures regarding Venezuela. Order of the Court of January 26, 2009, Considering clause 20, and Matter of Pueblo Indigena Kankaumo, supra note 2, fourth considering clause.