3 f) The final solution to the problem in Venezuelan detention centers and, in particular, in the Rodeo Prison, also calls for full medium and long-term measures. Notwithstanding, the urgency and immediacy of the present situation requires from the State the adoption of high-impact measures for the risky situation in which the people requiring these protective measures are. 4. The request of the Inter-American Commission so that the Court, based on Article 63(2) of the American Convention, orders the State: a. to adopt without delay, all security and control measures that are necessary to preserve the life and personal integrity of the people who are deprived of freedom, visitors and personnel of Rodeo I and Rodeo II Capital Regional Judicial Confinement; and the people who could be admitted to the detention center at issue in the future; b. to adopt all measures necessary to prevent the inmates from receiving ill-treatment and excessive punishments by the personnel in charge of the premises; c. to provide the “Rodeo Prison” with sufficient, well-trained and equipped prison guards in order to avoid the repetition of violent acts; d. to adopt all measures necessary to substantially reduce the overcrowding in the “Rodeo Prison” and to divide the inmates by categories in order to avoid new violent acts; e. to adopt all measures necessary to confiscate the weapons from the hands of the inmates and to prevent the entering of weapons in the prison premises and the manufacturing of handcrafted arms, in order to avoid the repetition of violent acts; f. to report, as soon as possible, on the investigation carried out in relation to the violent acts occurred inside the premises of Rodeo I and Rodeo II Capital Regional Judicial Confinement in order to adopt the necessary measures to prevent its repetition; g. to guarantee the regular supervision of the detention conditions and the physical condition of the confined people through an independent body and that the reports issued by such body be sent to the Court, and h. to accept the participation of the representatives of the beneficiaries in the process of the design and implementation of the provisional measures. 5. The note of the Secretariat of the Court (hereinafter, the “Secretariat”) of December 18, 2007, in which it was requested the Inter-American Commission to inform, no later than December 19, 2007, whether the present issue is related to some request or case in process before the Commission and if the Commission has adopted precautionary measures. 6. The communication of the Commission of December 19, 2007, in which it noted that the instant matter “is not related to any related request or case in process before the Commission; and […] has neither issued precautionary measures before". 7. The note of the President of the Court (hereinafter, the “President) of December 21, 2007, in which it informed the parties that, considering that from the information provided by the Commission it was clear that the present matter was not in process before the Commission, has determined to bring the request for provisional measures to the attention to the full Court in order for the Tribunal to decide. Without prejudice to the foregoing, it was reminded to the State the general obligations under Article 1(1) of the Convention to respect the rights and freedoms therein established and to ensure to all persons subject to the jurisdiction the free and full exercise of those rights and freedoms and that, regardless of the existence of specific provisional measures, the State has the special obligation to guarantee the rights to every person who is confined. Furthermore, the Court requested the State to submit the observations it deems appropriate regarding the request for provisional measures. 8. The brief of the State of January 10, 2008, in which it pointed out that: