4 (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) That, in order not to introduce any changes in the situation, it refrain from any decision or act that would result in preventing RCTV from continuing to operate normally […] until the case has been processed before the Court […]; That, should measures such as the shut-down of RCTV transmissions and the seizure of its assets by the State have been executed already, it order the State to re-establish the situation until the case has been processed before the Court […], so that RCTV […] can continue to operate normally […]; That it refrain from threatening or carrying out against the said station, as well as against all the journalists, management, shareholders and employees of this medium […], any form or act of arbitrary cancellation or non-renewal of the license that allows it to operate as an open television station in Venezuela; That it refrain from any other action aimed at illegitimately restricting freedom of expression or its assets and, in general, the human rights of those who subscribed to [the request for provisional measures], and That the provisional measures [granted] by the Court be ratified in toto […]. 8. The brief of May 29, 2007, and its appendixes, received by the Secretariat of the Court on June 4, 2007, in which fourteen persons,5 two of whom subscribed to the brief of May 28, 20076 (supra Having seen paragraph 7), alleged “victims and petitioners in the case presently before the inter-American system [, …] became parties to the [said] request submitted to the Court […] for the Court to urgently adopt provisional measures, in the face of the imminent danger of grave and irreparable damage to [their] human rights, particularly to freedom of expression, as a result of the shut-down of the transmissions [of RCTV].” In this brief, in addition to endorsing this request (supra Having seen paragraph 7), they stated, inter alia, that: (a) On “May 27, 2007, at 11:59:59, the State […] executed its decisions to close down RCTV for the alleged expiry and non-extension of its license, and to take or seize the transmission equipment,” and (b) “The request for the adoption of these provisional measures by the Court [… was] also based on the need to protect [them] as victims in the case of Luisiana Ríos et al.[…], for which the Commission had submitted the application […] to the Court, and whose situation had been aggravated extremely by the recent decisions adopted by the State.” Therefore, in this brief they asked the Court to order the State to adopt the following provisional measures: (a) To re-establish the situation until the case of Luisiana Ríos et al. pending before the Inter-American Court in which they are victims and parties has been processed, so that RCTV can continue to operate normally as a communication medium, in the same conditions in which it operated before the execution of the said measures; (b) That it refrain from threatening or carrying out against this station, or against all the journalists, management, shareholders and employees of the said medium, any form or act of arbitrary cancellation or non-renewal of the license that allows it to operate as an open television station in Venezuela”; (c) That it refrain from any other action aimed at illegitimately restricting freedom of expression or its assets and, in general, the human rights of those who subscribed to the […] petition; and finally, (d) That the provisional measures previously granted by the Court be ratified in toto for [their] protection and that the State be ordered once again to comply fully with them. 5 Luis Augusto Contreras Alvarado, Eduardo Sapene Granier, Wilmer Marcano, Winston Gutiérrez, Isabel Mavarez, Samuel Sotomayor, Anahís Cruz, Herbigio Henríquez, Armando Amaya, Laura Castellanos, Argenis Uribe, Pedro Nikken, Noé Pernía and Carlos Colmenares 6 Isabel Mavarez and Eduardo Sapene.