2
5.
The note of March 2, 2011, in which, on the instructions of the President, the
Secretariat asked the State to submit specific information in its next report on the
implementation of these measures, since it had not done so in its report of February 21,
2011 (supra having seen paragraph 4).
6.
The brief and its attachment of March 16, 2011, in which the Commission asked
for an expansion of the present provisional measures in favor of nine next of kin and six
representatives of the beneficiaries.
7.
The alleged facts upon which the Inter-American Commission based its request to
expand the measures:
a) On January 24, 2011, armed members of the federal police, in uniform, went to
the home of the beneficiary, José Ángel Alvarado Favela, together with officials
from the local office in Ciudad Juárez of the Attorney General’s Office. The police
attempted to detain the said beneficiary because “he had filed an application for
amparo in order to find José Ángel Alvarado Herrera, Nitza Paola Alvarado
Espinoza, and Rocío Irene Alvarado Reyes,” which required him “to go to the said
local office in order to provide information on the whereabouts of his next of kin.”
Mr. Alvarado Favela expressed his fear of the uniformed officers and told them
that it was the state officials who should provide information on his missing next
of kin;
b) On January 28, 2011, Mr. Alvarado Favela, accompanied by his representatives
Luz Esthela Castro and Gabino Gómez, went to the Attorney General’s Office,
having complied with the general requirements for access. Despite this, they
were told that, in order to be allowed access, additional information was required
together with photographs of Mr. Alvarado Favela. The latter and his
representatives decided not to allow their photographs or their fingerprints to be
taken and left the office;
c) On January 29, 2011, federal police and officials from the Attorney General’s
Office visited Mr. Alvarado Favela’s home again. On not finding him there, the
officials proceeded to photograph his house and the surrounding areas;
d) On January 29, 2011, Mr. Alvarado Favela received a call on his mobile phone
during which a man told him: “We have your son and he is alive; we’re going to
kill you and your children like dogs; you have 12 hours to leave your house and
the city, otherwise we will kill everyone because you’ve been talking too much.”
After this call, the Alvarado family left their homes and jobs and “[are] in hiding.”
8.
The Commission’s arguments in support of its request to expand provisional
measures, including:
a) The next of kin for whom this expansion is requested are part of the same
household as the current beneficiaries and, therefore, find themselves in the
same situation of extreme gravity, urgency, and risk of irreparable harm;
b) The said next of kin, mainly children, have been directly affected by “the
extreme measures that the beneficiaries have had to adopt in order to safeguard
their life and physical integrity” in the face of continued acts of intimidation and
threats against them;
c) From the language used in the threatening phone call, it is apparent that the aim
is to silence those who are publicly denouncing the disappearance of the original
beneficiaries and the alleged participation of military officials in these events, and
to prevent the investigation from continuing;
d) The representatives in whose favor an expansion of the present measures is
being sought have played “an active role not only in the context of processing
the provisional measures at the international level, but they have [also]
continued to denounce the facts at the domestic level” and, in this regard, they
“make written submissions” to various authorities and appear before them to

Select target paragraph3