5 in these circumstances, the President may require the State in question to adopt such urgent measures as necessary to ensure the effectiveness of any provisional measures the Court may order at its next session. Based on these powers, the President, in an Order of April 1, 2011 (hereinafter “the President’s Order”), decided: 1. To require the State to adopt the necessary measures to protect the rights to life and physical integrity of the following individuals: J.O.A.R., R.G.A.R., S.A.R., and J.E.A.R., children of the beneficiary Jaime Alvarado Herrera; Sandra Luz Rueda Quezada, wife of Jaime Alvarado Herrera; J.G.A., daughter of the beneficiary Rosa Olivia Alvarado Herrera; D.J.A. and J.A., daughters of the beneficiary Manuel Melquíades Alvarado Herrera, and Mayra Daniela Salais Rodríguez, wife of Manuel Melquíades Alvarado Herrera. 2. To reiterate to the State that it must adopt immediately all necessary measures to ascertain promptly the whereabouts of Rocío Irene Alvarado Reyes, Nitza Paola Alvarado Espinoza, and José Ángel Alvarado Herrera, and to protect their life, and personal integrity and liberty. 3. To reiterate to the State that it must adopt immediately all necessary measures to protect the life and physical integrity of Patricia Reyes Rueda; A.A.R. and A.A.R., children of the beneficiary Patricia Reyes Rueda; M.U.A., daughter of the beneficiary Rocío Irene Alvarado Reyes; Manuel Reyes; Obdulia Espinoza Beltrán; J.A.E., J.A.A.E., and A.A.E., children of the beneficiaries José Ángel Alvarado Herrera and Obdulia Espinoza Beltrán; José Ángel Alvarado Favela; Concepción Herrera Hernández; Jaime Alvarado Herrera; Manuel Melquíades Alvarado Herrera; Rosa Olivia Alvarado Herrera; K.P.A.A. and F.A.H., children of the beneficiary Rosa Olivia Alvarado Herrera; Feliz García; M.P.A.E., N.C.A.E., and D.A.E., daughters of the beneficiary Nitza Paola Alvarado Espinoza; María de Jesús Alvarado Espinoza; Rigoberto Ambriz Marrufo; María de Jesús Espinoza Peinado, and Ascención Alvarado Favela. 4. To reiterate to the State that it must adopt immediately all necessary measures to protect the life and physical integrity of Emilia González Tercero. 5. To reject the request to expand the present provisional measures to include Patricia Galarza Gándara, Luz Esthela Castro Rodríguez, Oscar Enríquez, Javier Ávila, Francisca Galván and Gabino Gómez, as established in [the said] decision. 6. To require the State to take all pertinent measures to ensure that the protective measures required in [the] Order are planned and carried out with the participation of the beneficiaries or their representatives, so that the said measures are provided diligently and effectively and, in general, to keep them informed of any progress in the implementation of the measures. 7. To convene Mexico, the representatives of the beneficiaries, and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights to a public hearing to be held at the seat of the InterAmerican Court of Human Rights during its next regular session from June 27 to July 9, 2011, in order to hear specific updated information from the State, and the observations of the representatives and the Inter-American Commission on the status of implementation of these provisional measures. […] 8. To ask the State to provide information to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights by June 1, 2011, at the latest, on the measures adopted to comply with the first operative paragraph of [the] Order. 9. To ask the representatives of the beneficiaries and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights to present any observations they deem pertinent on the State’s report mentioned in the preceding operative paragraph within four and six weeks, respectively. Both time limits to be calculated from the reception [of the] corresponding State report. […] 13. The State’s brief of April 5, 2011, presenting a bi-monthly report on the implementation of the present measures. 14. The briefs of March 30 and May 6, 2011, and their attachments, in which the representatives presented their observations on the State’s reports of February 21 and April 5, 2011 (supra first and thirteenth having seen paragraphs). In these briefs, the representatives indicated, in response to the beneficiaries’ supposed lack of collaboration