7 and the Commission to argue and prove that such lack of investigation contributes to or gives rise to a situation of extreme gravity and urgency to avoid irreparable damage to a concrete beneficiary. * * * 25. That the representatives pointed out that another element that the Court should bear in mind when assessing whether or not to maintain the provisional measures is the "information [...] that reveals or confirms the existence of significant risk to a person, group, area, etc.” 26. That, in order to establish whether or not the situation of extreme gravity and urgency to avoid irreparable damage exists or persists, the Court may consider the political, historical, cultural or other factors or circumstances that affect beneficiaries, rendering them vulnerable at a certain moment and exposing them to have their rights infringed. This situation may worsen or improve with time, depending on countless variables. However, as stated above, only extreme and urgent situations will warrant protection through provisional measures. 27. That, first of all, there may exist a group of factors or circumstances that reveal serious attacks against a certain group of persons, putting them in a situation of extreme gravity and urgency in which they are likely to suffer irreparable damage. In such an extreme situation, for example, if a number of serious attacks are directed towards the group to which the beneficiaries belong in such a way that it may be reasonably inferred that they will also be attacked, the granting of provisional measures may be justified even if no direct threats have been recently targeted at such beneficiaries. The assessment of the existence of this group of factors is different from the one involved in adversarial cases, where the parties discuss the attribution of international responsibility to the State for engaging in or tolerating said practices. Proceedings for provisional measures are only aimed at verifying the existence of a risky situation, at a certain moment, and do not amount to a prejudgment of the case or the merits. 28. That, secondly, there may exist a situation with different characteristics from the ones described above (Considering clause 27) and that, in and of itself, does not constitute a situation of extreme gravity and urgency to avoid irreparable damage to a certain group. Should this be the case, said situation will only serve for assessing the concrete threat directed towards the beneficiary but not to justify the granting or maintenance of provisional measures.10 * * * 29. That in the instant case, the State, the representatives and the Commission agree that provisional measures ought to be maintained. 10 Cfr. Matter of Carlos Nieto et al. Provisional Measures regarding Venezuela. Order of the Court of January 26, 2009, considering clause nineteen, and Matter of Luis Uzcátegui, supra note 5, considering clause twenty-three.