3 e) f) g) h) support the Alvarado family. Consequently, they experience a “high level of exposure” as the driving force behind the internal investigations and the measures of protection before the organs of the inter-American system; The threat that the beneficiary, Mr. Alvarado Favela, received on his mobile phone occurred after his January 28, 2011, visit to the Attorney General’s Office accompanied by his representatives and proposed beneficiaries, Luz Esthela Castro and Gabino Gómez; The next of kin and the representatives have participated jointly in the activities of filing complaints and demanding justice. The latter accompany and provide support for the actions taken by the next of kin; At least one of the representatives who has taken part in these activities, the beneficiary Emilia González Tercero, has been a direct victim of harassment and acts of intimidation, “which reinforces the previous indications that the risk extends to the representatives”; and, There are contextual factors that “together with the above factors” give rise to a presumption of a situation of risk to the life and physical integrity of the representatives. In particular, the Commission indicated that according to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, at the national level, Chihuahua ranks first in the number of reported attacks against human rights defenders. In this regard, it indicated that these attacks are of a diverse nature and include “an intense climate of threats and harassment against human rights defenders who carry out their activities in the region.�� In this regard, it underscored that in many cases these threats have resulted “in the disappearance and/or murder of human rights defenders, many of whom were active in publicly denouncing abuses by the military in the state of Chihuahua.” 9. The Commission’s request that the Court, pursuant to Article 63(2) of the American Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter “the American Convention” or “the Convention”) and Article 27 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court1 (hereinafter “the Rules of Procedure”), require the State: a) To take immediate steps to protect [the] lives and physical integrity [of the proposed beneficiaries]; b) To investigate the facts that g[ave] rise to the present request to expand provisional measures as a means of identifying the source of the risk and ensuring a halt to the threats[,] and c) To coordinate the provisional measures with the proposed beneficiaries. 10. The State’s brief and accompanying attachments of March 25, 2011, as well as the additional attachments presented on March 28, 2011, in which it submitted its observations concerning the request to expand the provisional measures. With regard to the recent threats denounced by the Commission, the State: a) Indicated that it had requested information from the different authorities involved in the present matter “[a]s soon as it became aware of the facts” regarding the beneficiary, José Ángel Alvarado Favela, during the February 18, 2011, meeting with the beneficiaries and their representatives. In this regard, the State indicated that it had been agreed to respond to the requests made during this meeting at a later encounter held on March 4, 2011; however, at the that meeting, “it was not possible to reach agreement on key issues for the implementation of provisional measures”; b) Stressed “the unwillingness of the beneficiaries to assist in the investigations” conducted by the Attorney General’s Office to ascertain the whereabouts of Rocío Irene, Nitza Paola, and José Ángel Alvarado. In this regard, it said that “even 1 The Court’s Rules of Procedure approved at its eight-fifth regular session held from November 16 to 29, 2009.