2 before the Commission, they were victims of several threats and attacks. On June 20, 1997, the Commission requested the State to adopt provisional measures in favor of “[José] Mauricio García-Prieto-Hirlemann, Gloria Giralt de García-Prieto, and Carmen [Estrada] de García-Prieto, as well as in favor of the lawyers and witnesses related to the investigation and trial of the persons liable for the death of Ramón Mauricio García-Prieto-Giralt.” The measures ordered included the investigation into the origin of the threats and the punishment of the persons liable therefor; b) On November 20, 2001, the Commission addressed the State and reiterated the need to issue provisional measures “in order to protect the life and the physical integrity of [José] Mauricio García-Prieto-Hirlemann, Gloria Giralt de García-Prieto and their legal counselors from IDHUCA.” The Commission stated that, despite the issuance of said provisional measures, the beneficiaries had continued receiving threats and attacks that endangered their lives and personal integrity. Although the State has given protection to said persons, said protection is very limited and it has been granted without conducting an effective investigation that would have allowed for the identification of the perpetrators of said acts; c) on March 5, 2004, during the 119th Session, the Commission held a meeting to analyze the merits of the case, as well as any issues related to the provisional measures. During said meeting, the petitioners stated that the provisional measures ordered had not been complied with. On the other hand, the State expressed that it had protected the physical and psychological integrity of the García-Prieto-Giralt family and that of the lawyers participating in the case. As regards the lawyers, the State pointed out that they had been assigned a security service, which had been implemented pursuant to the conditions requested by the beneficiaries, in compliance with the provisional measures; d) on March 18, 2004, the State requested that the provisional measures be lifted since on October 7, 1999 Carmen Estrada de García-Prieto, widow of Ramón Mauricio García-Prieto-Giralt, due to personal reasons, decided to reject the protection services she had been assigned, and stated that she assumed the risks involved in her decision; e) on April 7, 2004, the petitioners informed that their lives and personal integrity were still at risk, and they also stated their disagreement with the way the National Civil Police was giving protection to the García-Prieto-Giralt family and two counselors from IDHUCA. Thus, they stated their willigness to “waive the provisional measures as regards to the protection granted by the National Civil Police, unless the decision-taking mechanisms on said protection service and its implementation were materially changed; f) however, the Commission stated that the provisional measures remained in force and operative due to the permanent threats received by the next of kin of Ramón Mauricio García-Prieto-Giralt and their lawyers, and José Benjamín Cuéllar-Martínez and María de los Ángeles García-Prieto-Giralt de Charur had special police protection; g) on February 9, 2006, the Commission received from the beneficiaries updated information on the implementation of the provisional measures in connection with the protection granted to José Benjamín Cuéllar-Martínez and María de los Ángeles García-Prieto de Charur and on new intimidating events occurred as of January 2005, and therefore, they requested the Commission to urge the State “to adopt the measures necessary to guarantee the life and personal integrity of the beneficiaries of the provisional measures, which should be duly agreed with the beneficiaries and their representatives.” On