5 5. The Tribunal has already established on prior occasions that in the context of provisional measures, it does not fall to the Court to consider the merits of any argument that is not strictly related to extreme gravity, urgency and the need to avoid irreparable damages to the beneficiaries. Any other matter can be brought before the Court in an adversarial case or in requests for advisory opinions.11 6. The representatives have submitted a variety of information on the legislative measures adopted with regard generally to individuals deprived of liberty in the Province of Mendoza. Regarding this, they expressed their concern over legislation that they consider to be "repressive or in violation of human rights," indicating that Law No. 7.929 on prisoner releases restricts the right to freedom during criminal proceeding, which according to them brings with it a "considerable increase in the prison population." They also indicated that the program of the Ministry of the Government for the chemical castration of sex offenders established both medical and therapeutic treatment through Decree No. 308 of March 3, 2010, a decree intended to prevent parliamentary debate on it. Also, even when the Tribunal decided not to broaden the provisional measures to cover Penitentiary Complex III “Almafuerte” in Cacheuta (supra Having Seen 7), the representatives continued to submit information on it. 7. For its part, the State made detailed reference to the manner in which the legal defense of the inmates was carried out in administrative disciplinary proceedings in the penitentiaries via a team of public defenders staffed by officials operatively and functionally answering to the Human Rights Directorate, under the Subsecretariat of Justice and Human Rights Those defenders took charge of reporting to the Human Rights Directorate of the Province on any problems taking place in any penitentiary unit, along with attending to the complaints brought by the inmates before that directorate via petitions prepared in writing or through their relatives. It also indicated that recently, an Office of the Attorney General Law was passed providing for the creation of ombudsman's offices for sentence execution. Regarding this, the Commission held, inter alia, that "justice is being neglected" as the judicial administrative penitentiary sentence execution proceedings are slow; it indicated that there are only two sentence execution judges and that the slowness of the proceedings prevent the application of the differentiated regimen while the inmates of the Gustavo André prison facility, in Lavalle, did not receive prompt attention to their requests for temporary leave and other benefits. 8. Elsewhere, the State indicated that in the San Felipe prison, 325 inmates are “being educated" and 350 work; and in the Boulogne Sur Mer prison, 325 inmates are studying and 351 participate in labor activities. In the André complex, in Lavalle, they have satellite classrooms with 75 lecture hours to implement various courses. Although the representatives did not make specific reference to this point, the Commission indicated that "one of the frequent causes of violence among the prisoners continues to be the lack of activities to occupy them during recreational hours." The Commission also observed during its in loco visit carried out in 2009 that there is "a high percentage of inmates who do not have access to any kind of labor, educational, or recreational activity, nor access to telephones to communicate with the outside world" and, with regard to the inmates in the 11 Cf. Case of James et al. Provisional Measures regarding Trinidad and Tobago. Order of the Inter-American Court of August 29, 1998, Considering six; Matter of Eloisa Barrios et al. Provisional Measures regarding Venezuela. Order of the Court of February 4, 2010, Considering 3, and Matter of Belfort Istúriz et al. Request for Provisional Measures presented by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights with regard to Venezuela. Order of the Court of April 15, 2010, Considering 9.