2. The brief of April 17, 2013, wherein the Republic of Argentina (hereinafter “the State” or “Argentina”) filed the brief required by operative paragraph five of the Order of February 13, 2013 (supra Having seen clause 1). Moreover, the briefs of May 28 and July 12, 2013, wherein the State presented information on the implementation of these provisional measures. Moreover, the brief of August 16, 2013, wherein it expressed its position on the request made by the representatives to the Court asking that the provisional measures be newly adopted in favor of specific persons, as well as on the actions taken in regard to Ms. Verónica Heredia, which the representatives reported (infra Having Seen clause 3). Lastly, the brief of October 1, 2013, wherein the State provided information on whether there is risk to Ms. María Leontina Millacura Llaipén, her children, Fabiola Valeria Torres Millacura and Marcos Alejandro Torres Millacura, and her grandchildren, Evelyn Paola Caba, Ivana Valeria Torres Hernández and Romina Marcela Torres Hernández, as well as to Ms. Verónica Heredia. By way of this brief, the State also reported on the procedures being taken to reach a consensus on the measures of protection in favor of Mr. Guillermo Flores and Ms. Alba Rosana Vera González, beneficiaries of these provisional measures. 3. The briefs of May 2 and 21, 2013, wherein the representatives of the beneficiaries (hereinafter “the representatives”) presented their observations to the State’s brief of April 17, 2013 (supra Having Seen clause 2). By way of these briefs, the representatives requested the Court to “newly adopt the provisional measures” that were lifted in the Court’s Order of February 13, 2013 (supra Having Seen clause 1), in favor of María Leontina Millacura Llaipén, Fabiola Valeria Torres Millacura, Marcos Alejandro Torres Millacura, Evelyn Paola Caba, Ivana Valeria Torres Hernández, Romina Marcela Torres Hernández, Miguel Ángel Sánchez and Tamara Bolívar. Moreover, they requested that the provisional measures be extended in favor of Iván Eladio Torres and they provided information on the risk to Guillermo Flores, beneficiary thereof, and Verónica Heredia, the attorney of Millacura Llaipén. Moreover, the brief of August 7, 2013, wherein the representatives provided their observations to the State’s briefs of May 28, and July 12, 2013 (supra Having Seen clause 2). Lastly, the briefs of October 18 and 25, 2013, in which they provided their observations to the information provided by Argentina on October 1, 2013 (supra Having Seen clause 2) and they indicated that they would not continue representing Mr. Guillermo Flores nor Ms. Alba Rosana Vera González. 4. The brief of June 14, 2013, wherein the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Inter-American Commission” or “the Commission”) filed its observations on the State’s report of April 17, 2013 and the briefs provided by the representatives on May 2 and 21, 2013 (supra Having Seen clause 2 and 3). Moreover, the briefs of August 13 and 14, 2013, wherein the Commission presented its observations on the State’s briefs of May 28, July 12, and August 16, 2013. Lastly, the brief of October 31, 2013, it provided its observations to the information presented by Argentina on October 1, 2013 (supra Having Seen clause 2). 5. The note of the Secretariat of August 19, 2013, wherein the representatives and the Commission were asked to present the observations they deemed relevant to the information provided by the State on August 16, 2013, by no later than August 26, 2013. The representatives did not present the required observations. CONSIDERING THAT: 1. The Republic of Argentina became a State Party to the American Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter “the American Convention” or “the Convention”) since September 5, 1984 and according to Article 62 thereof, acknowledged the jurisdiction of the Court on the day of ratification. 2