that of her children, and (g) require the State, the representatives and the Commission to submit, at the latest by February 1, 2012, a clear and detailed report on the specific steps taken to implement these measures. A) Regarding the appointment of a State authority, the issue and renewal of safe conducts, and a working group or team to collaborate in the implementation of the measures ordered by the Court as well as the scheduling of work meetings A.1) Regarding the appointment of a State authority 10. In its brief of February 1, 2012, the State advised that it had appointed Rafael Cruz, of the General Directorate of Immigration, and Santo Miguel Octavio Román García, Deputy Director General for Immigration, to be responsible for delivering the safe conducts, and provided their contact details. 11. In their briefs of February 10 and 17, 2012, the representatives and the Commission, respectively, took note of the information provided by the State on the contact details of the State authorities. In this regard, the representatives observed that Messrs. Cruz and Román no longer worked with the said Directorate. A.2) Regarding the issue and renewal of safe conducts 12. With regard to the issue and renewal of the safe conducts in favor of the beneficiaries, the State reiterated its willingness to grant the remaining safe conducts, but alleged that those individuals who had not received a safe conduct had not contacted the authorities. In this regard, the State indicated that these individuals could go to the General Directorate of Immigration to obtain the safe conducts. 13. In their observations of February 1, 2012, the representatives indicated that no State representative had responded to their efforts before the General Directorate of Immigration. In their brief of February 10, 2012, in response to the State’s report of February 1, 2012, the representatives reiterated their commitment to take the necessary steps to ensure that the State complied with its obligation to take action, given that the State had failed to comply with the provisional measures. 14. Furthermore, together with their brief of February 1, 2012, the representatives forwarded the Court a list with the names of the individuals who had been granted safe conducts or whose safe conducts had been renewed. The list shows that four members of the Medina Ferreras family; Berson Gelin; four members of the Sensión family, and eight members of the Fils-Aimé family received safe conducts. In addition, eight members of the Jean family received safe conducts. According to this list, 10 members of the abovementioned families have not yet received a safe conduct.7 15. The representatives also pointed out that, due to disregard for the validity of the safe conducts, the beneficiaries were subjected to “episodes of violence” from the authorities. The representatives attributed those incidents to the State’s failure to take the measures agreed at the first meeting of the working group that collaborates in the implementation of the measures ordered by the Court. Likewise, they indicated that those measures are essential to ensure the effectiveness of the safe conducts. 7 Namely: Kimberly Pérez Medina, Pili Sainlis (partner of Berson Gelin), William Gelin, Jamson Gelin, Kenson Gelin, and Faica Gelin resident in Anse-A-Pitre, Haiti, and Reyita Antonia Sensión, Emiliano Mache Sensión, Maximiliano Sensión and the daughter of Ana Lidia Sensión, all resident in Dominican Republic. 4