2 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. Luis Guillermo Pérez, Nory Giraldo de Jaramillo, Marina San Miguel-Duarte, Viviana Barrera-Cruz, Luz Mery Pinzón-López, y Mariela Contreras-Cruz. 3. To require the State to investigate the facts that gave rise to said urgent measures, and to identify those responsible and punish them as appropriate. 4. To require the State to allow the representatives of the beneficiaries to participate in the planning and implementation of the provisional measures, and, in general, to inform the Court of progress regarding the implementation of said measures. […] 3. The second and third reports submitted by the State of Colombia (hereinafter, “the State” or “Colombia”) on the implementation of the provisional measures on August 24, and November 8, 2005, as well as the comments submitted by the representatives of the beneficiaries of the provisional measures (hereinafter, “the representatives”) on October 7, and December 22, 2005, and by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter, “the Inter-American Commission” or “the Commission”) on December 16, 2005, and January 20, 2006. 4. The note submitted by the Secretariat of the Court (hereinafter, “the Secretariat”) on May 25, 2006, in which, following the instructions of the President, it requested the State to submit, as soon as possible, the fourth, fifth, and sixth reports on the implementation of the provisional measures, whose terms for submission had expired on January 3, March 3, and May 3, 2006, respectively. 5. The report submitted by the State on July 19, 2006, which constituted its fourth, fifth and sixth reports, as well as the comments on said report submitted by the Commission on September 13, 2006. 6. The note submitted by the Secretariat on February 27, 2007, in which it stated that the terms for the State to submit its seventh, eighth, and ninth reports on the provisional measures had expired, respectively, on September 19, 2006, November 19, 2006, and January 19, 2007. Furthermore, the Secretariat stated that the term for the representatives to submit their comments on the fourth, fifth, and sixth reports of the State had expired on August 25, 2006. Consequently, following the instructions of the President, the Secretariat requested the State and the representatives to submit, no later than March 14, 2007, in a single written document, all reports and comments pending submission, which should include updated concrete information on the manner in which said measures would have been implemented. Finally, the Secretariat stated that, once the Court has this information and the comments of the parties, it should be decided whether the provisional measures shall continue in force. 7. The reports submitted by the State on April 18, May 9, and July 24, 2007. The State asked the Court, in its latter report, to “consider the possibility of rescinding” the provisional measures so ordered. 8. The notes submitted by the Secretariat on April 20, May 22, and July 31, 2007, in which it stated that the terms for representatives to submit their comments on the reports submitted by the State on July 19, 2006, May 8, and July 24, 2007, had expired. For this reason, the Secretariat asked the representatives to submit said comments as soon as possible. Furthermore, the Secretariat also stated that it has not received the Commission’s