9. The State replied in a note received on January 23, 2007, requesting an extension of 30 days to expand on the information, as it did not have the documentation extracted from case 12.402, and it requested that this documentation be sent. On February 26, 2007, the petitioners sent additional information which contained several volumes. 10. On March 2, 2007, the State’s reply of January 23 was forwarded to the petitioners, giving them one month to present any comments. 11. On March 27, 2007 the petitioners sent their observations on the State’s communication of January 23, 2007. On April 27, 2007, the petitioners’ communication of February 26, 2007, was transmitted to the State, giving it one month to present any comments. 12. On May 10, 2007, the petitioners’ observations of March 27, 2007, were passed on to the State, giving it one month to present any comments. On June 5, 2007, the State sent a communication to the IACHR saying that it would present its observations that were due by May 26 and June 10 together before the latter deadline. 13. On July 12 the petitioners resubmitted several documents that had been illegible as originally sent. On July 24, 2007, the State sent observations, which were forwarded to the petitioners with a note of July 26, 2007, giving them one month to present any comments. 14. On August 30, 2007, the petitioners sent their observations, which were transmitted to the State by note of September 17, 2007, giving it one month to present any comments. The State sent its reply in a note received by the IACHR on November 14, 2007, which was forwarded to the petitioners on December 3, 2007. Their observations, received on January 4, 2008, were sent to the State for its information on January 15, 2008. III. PROVISIONAL MEASURES 15. On August 30, 2004, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Inter-American Court” or “the Court”), considering that the execution of the alleged victims “would produce an irreparable situation and the State would have committed an action incompatible with the Convention’s object and purpose,” 3 decided to require the State of Guatemala …to adopt forthwith the necessary measures to protect the lives of Ronald Ernesto Raxcacó Reyes, Hugo Humberto Ruiz Fuentes, Bernardino Rodríguez Lara and Pablo Arturo Ruiz Almengor so as not to hinder the processing of their cases before the inter-American system for the protection of human rights.4 16. On November 8, 2005, the State informed the Court that on October 21, 2005, 19 prisoners, including Mr. Hugo Humberto Ruiz Fuentes, escaped from Escuintla high-security prison, also known as “Little Hell.” As a result, Guatemala requested the suspension of the provisional measures on behalf of Mr. Ruiz Fuentes, as 3 I-A Court, Provisional Measures Raxcacó Reyes. Order of the Court of August 30, 2004. Preamble Nº 9. 4 I-A Court, Provisional Measures Raxcacó Reyes. Order of the Court of August 30, 2004. Operative para. Nº 1. 3