6 Ombudsman, and the Attorney General, among others. On October 18, 2010, a second meeting was held in which Mr. Humberto Prado, representative of the Venezuelan Prison Observatory, was denied entrance. The representatives made reference to what was agreed upon in these meetings and their results; g) Health Day was held “only once.” Regarding educational programs, the inmates attested that up until November 10, 2010 “classes ha[d] not begun”; h) the information provided by the State “does not contribute real solutions to the ongoing problems at [Tocorón prison].” It is evident that deterioration of the facility has occurred because of a lack of proper maintenance, together with the sheer number of inmates that, according to the State’s brief, is certainly greater than the facility’s capacity; furthermore, there is a total absence of duly qualified and trained personnel to maintain security in the facility “in strict observance of human rights”; and i) given the impossibility for the representatives of the beneficiaries to enter qua representatives to verify the actions undertaken by the State, they opted to enter as common visitors, subjecting themselves to the inspection procedures as conducted by the National Guard, Aragua State Police, and prison guards. The representatives requested that the State be reminded of its duty to cooperate with the representatives in the planning and implementation of these measures. CONSIDERING: 1. Venezuela became a state party to the American Convention on August 9, 1977, and in accordance with Article 62 of the Convention, recognized the contentious jurisdiction of the Court on June 24, 1981. 2. Article 63(2) of the American Convention provides that, “[i]n cases of extreme gravity and urgency, and when necessary to avoid irreparable damage to persons, the Court shall adopt such provisional measures as it deems pertinent in matters it has under consideration. With respect to a case not yet submitted to the Court, it may act at the request of the Commission.” 3. In the terms of Article 27 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court1: 1. At any stage of proceedings involving cases of extreme gravity and urgency, and when necessary to avoid irreparable damage to persons, the Court may, on its own motion, order such provisional measures as it deems appropriate, pursuant to Article 63(2) of the Convention. 1 2009. Rules of Procedure of the Court approved during its LXXXV Regular Session held from November 16-28,