4 obligations under Article 1(1) of the Convention to respect the right and freedoms enshrined therein and to ensure to all persons subject to its jurisdiction the free and full exercise of those rights and freedoms. 9. That the representatives of the Gómez-Paquiyauri family as well as the InterAmerican Commission requested in November 2007 that the provisional measures ordered in favor of the family be maintained for an additional period of at least six months. The representatives considered that, at the time, there was a “tense atmosphere” in Peru in relation to the Judgment rendered by this Court in the Case of the Miguel Castro-Castro Prison, and given that there is a connection between the case and some members of the Gómez-Paquiyauri family, it would be convenient to maintain the measures ordered in their favor to avoid “giving the wrong impression that they have lost the protection afforded by the Inter-American Court” (supra Having Seen clauses No. 8 and 9). 10. That, after the period of six months requested by the representatives and the Commission (supra Considering clause No. 10) had elapsed, the Court received no information showing that the beneficiaries who are members of the Gómez-Paquiyauri family were in a situation of extreme gravity and urgency or that there was a threat to their lives or physical integrity as a result of the Judgment delivered by this Court in the Case of the Miguel Castro-Castro Prison. 11. That provisional measures are exceptional in nature and are therefore ordered having regard to the need for protection and, once ordered, they must be maintained provided that the Court finds that the basic requirements of extreme gravity and urgency and the need to prevent irreparable damage to the rights of the persons protected by them are still met.2 In the instant case, the Court does not believe that the circumstances of extreme gravity and urgency and the need to prevent irreparable damage that existed at the time the provisional measures were ordered in favor of the Gómez-Paquiyauri family still exist. * * * 12. That the representatives of Jacinta Peralta-Allccarima and Nora Emely Gómez-Peralta as well as of Ángel del Rosario Vásquez-Chumo and the members of his family, respectively, have failed to submit the information requested by means of the note of the Secretariat of October 30, 2007, which request was reiterated by means of the notes of the Secretariat of January 18, February 4, and April 10, 2008 (supra Having Seen clauses No. 6 and 10), namely, their comments on the existence and continuation of the situation of extreme gravity and urgency and potential risk of irreparable damage that would warrant maintaining the provisional measures ordered by the Court in favor of these persons. 13. That, as regards the beneficiaries Jacinta Peralta-Allccarima and minor Nora Emely Gómez-Peralta, despite not having received their comments (supra Having Seen clause No. 10 and Considering clause No. 12), in the four years during which the provisional measures have been in force, no incident has been reported in which the State has interfered with 2 Cf. Case of the Constitutional Court, supra footnote 1, Considering clause No. 3, Case of CaballeroDelgado and Santana. Provisional Measures regarding Colombia. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of February 6, 2008, Considering clause No. 7, and Case of Álvarez et al. Provisional Measures regarding Colombia. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of February 8, 2008, Considering clause No. 13.