2 Commission), representatives of the beneficiaries of the provisional measures (hereinafter “the representatives”), reporting the alleged disappearance of Johana López, Mónica Suárez, Enrique Chimonja, Fabio Ariza and Edwin Mosquera, who were members of the Comisión Intereclesial Justicia y Paz, and “who [were] beneficiaries of precautionary measures” ordered by the Inter-American Commission. 6. The communication of the Secretariat of April 4, 2005, whereby, following the President’s instructions, the State was required to include in the following report on provisional measures, due on April 21, 2005, detailed information regarding the alleged disappearance of the individuals named in the communication of the Commission (supra Having Seen clause No. 5). 7. The communication of the representatives of April 19, 2005, whereby they provided the “names of the persons who testified before the Procuraduría Delegada para la Prevención en materia de Derechos Humanos y Asuntos Étnicos (Delegate Attorney General’s Office for the Prevention of Human Rights and Ethnic Affairs) and filed a petition for the protection of constitutional rights regarding the planting of [African] oil palm in communal property and private property and to whom the Order of the Court [of March 15, 2005] specifically referred.” These persons are: Hugo de Jesús Tuberquia-Tuberquia, Andrés Borja-Romaña, Eladio Blandón-Denis, Lus Mary Cabeza-Martínez, Ligia María Chaverra-Mena, Enrique Manuel Petro-Hernández, Miguel Mariano Martínez-Cuava, Cristóbal Blandón-Borja, José del Carmen VillalbaAlgumedos, Willinton Cuesta-Córdoba, Epifanio Córdoba-Borja and Erasmo SierraOrtiz. 8. The note of the State, received on April 22, 2005, requesting a twenty-day extension to submit the report on the provisional measures ordered in this matter. The communication of the Secretariat of April 25, 2005, whereby, following the President’s instructions, the State was granted an extension until May 12, 2005 to submit the relevant report. 9. The note of the State, received on May 13, 2005, requesting another twentyday extension to submit the report regarding the provisional measures ordered in this case. The communication of the Secretariat of May 16, 2005, whereby, following the President’s instructions, the State was given an extension until May 27, 2005, which may not be further extended. 10. The note of the Secretariat of June 9, 2005, whereby, following the President’s directions, the State was required to submit, as soon as possible, the report in response to operative paragraph number four of the Order issued by the Court on March 15, 2005 (supra Having Seen clause No.3). 11. The communication of the State, received on June 15, 2005, requesting a fifteen-day extension to submit the report regarding the provisional measures ordered in this matter. The note of the Secretariat of June 16, 2005, whereby, following the President’s instructions, the State was informed that the request for extension was denied given that the period to submit said report, including the two extensions granted, expired on May 27, 2005, and was, therefore, required to submit the report as soon as possible. 12. The communication of the Secretariat of July 4, 2005, whereby, the State was notified that the period to submit the report expired on May 27, 2005, and, following the President’s instructions, the State was required to submit said report as soon as