leaders to be executed, the alleged disappearance and extrajudicial executions, [and] the alleged paramilitary presence with the State’s acquiescence, among other elements, are extremely serious.” In addition, regarding the extreme urgency, it indicated that “the absence of guarantees of adequate and effective measures of protection is a fundamental element to be taken into consideration.” Also, it stated that the “nature of the rights that are under threat, in other words, the right to life and physical integrity of the beneficiaries, constitutes the requirement of irreparability of the consequences that maintaining the provisional measures seeks to avoid.” In this regard, the Commission indicated that, although the State had taken “some measures” for the protection of the beneficiaries, these had not been effective, and that the State had not presented information that proved that the situation that gave rise to these provisional measures had been overcome. In its communication of January 25, 2013 (supra having seen paragraph 6), the Commission mentioned that, in Decision 299 of December 18, 2012, the Constitutional Court of Colombia had indicated that there were still security problems related to the situation of public order in the area of the communities of the Jiguamiandó and of the Curvaradó and to the “tensions relating to the restitution process,” which required the adoption of preventive mechanisms. In this regard, in its brief of May 10, 2013 (supra having seen paragraph 6), it indicated that “the actual situation of extreme gravity and urgency [was] also demonstrated by […] the November 2012 visit of an international verification commission, [which verified] the actions of the paramilitary groups against the communities. Lastly, the Commission took note of the information presented by the State in relation to the action plan that the Urabá Police Department had prepared, but considered that the “information presented, without the respective documentary support, [was] insufficient to show that the situation of extreme gravity and danger of the beneficiaries of the measures had been surmounted.” 44. In conclusion, the Commission found that it was not sufficient that the State had taken certain measures; rather these had to be effective to respond to the situation of extreme gravity, risk and irreparability of the damage. In this regard, from the information presented during the processing of these provisional measures, as well as from the consideration of the Constitutional Court of Colombia, the Commission considered that the provisional measures should be kept in force. E.4. Considerations of the Inter-American Court 45. The State has requested the lifting of the provisional measures based on the principle of subsidiarity contained in the Preamble to the American Convention. It indicated that, under Colombian law and also the orders of the Constitutional Court, the State has the obligation to adopt measures of protection in favor of all the members of the communities of the Jiguamiandó and of the Curvaradó, including the beneficiaries of these provisional measures. In conclusion, the State argued that it is providing protection to the beneficiaries by means of the internal mechanisms established to this end. On the other hand, the InterAmerican Commission and the representatives indicated that the validity of the provisional measures should be evaluated based on whether the risk factors that gave rise to them subsist and whether the situation of extreme gravity and urgency and the risk of irreparable damage continues, pursuant to Article 63(2) of the Convention. Both the latter concluded that, throughout the processing of the provisional measures, they had advised the Court of facts that constituted the said requirements, so that the situation of risk for the beneficiaries continued. Consequently, they considered that the provisional measures should not be lifted. 46. On several occasions the Court has established that, when ordering measures of protection, the Court’s standard of assessment of these requirements is prima facie, and, at 18