17 protect the life and integrity of Mr. Humberto Prado, by virtue of his capacity as representative of the beneficiaries. To that purpose, it has been mentioned that Mr. Prado is, allegedly, under investigation, so as to try him for the crime of treason and for having instigated civil rebellion, for his activities as representative of the beneficiaries of these provisional measures. The State has not contested said averment of the representatives (supra Considering clause 24). 35. That the treatment afforded by the State to Mr. Humberto Prado, in his capacity as director of a non-governmental organization that represents the beneficiaries of these measures, must be appreciated within the context of extreme violence that, as has been confirmed in this Order, exists in several prisons of Venezuela (supra Considering clauses 14, 15 and 16). According to information recently furnished (supra Having Seen clause 6.d), the Tribunal knows for a fact that Mr. Prado is and has been an intermediary in several highly volatile situations of confrontation between the State and the beneficiary of provisional measures. For example, recently, in El Rodeo confinement center, the beneficiaries apparently kidnapped a civil servant and requested the presence of Mr. Prado, among other people, to negotiate the situation and handle the queries of the inmates. Facts like these prove that Mr. Prado has been involved in dangerous situations as active representative of the beneficiaries. 36. That said context of violence and volatility places Mr. Humberto Prado in a situation prima facie of serious danger for his life and integrity that, according to what was recently informed, require urgent protective measures. Therefore, the Tribunal considers that these provisional measures must be expanded in order to protect the life and integrity of Mr. Humberto Prado. B.2) Carlos Nieto Palma 37. That, as to the request for expansion of these measures in favor of Mr. Carlos Nieto, the Tribunal recalls that the measures granted in his favor, dated July 9, 2004, were rescinded by means of Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of January 26, 2009, in view of the fact that no information was submitted proving that the situation of extreme gravity and urgency and the need to avoid irreparable damage that existed back when the provisional measures were ordered in his favor still persisted12. 38. That, without detriment to the foregoing, the Court notes that the instant request for expansion of measures is based on facts different to the ones indicated, back then, in the order of provisional measures in favor of Mr. Nieto five years ago. According to the representatives, on August 19, 2009, Mr. Carlos Nieto was visited was visited at his residence by three alleged officers connected to the Metropolitan Police, who were in uniform and were holding their helmets and who, allegedly, threatened or intimidated him in order to stop making public statements about the situation of the people detained in 'Tocoron' Confinement Center. 39. That, contrary to what was previously mentioned in relation to Mr. Prado, the alleged threats or intimidating acts against Mr. Nieto are not related to these provisional measures, since the ‘Tocorón’ Confinement Center is not one of the four penitentiary centers related to this matter. As a consequence, the Court considers it is inadmissible to accept the request for expansion of provisional measures in favor of Mr. Nieto. However, the Tribunal recalls 12 Cf. Matter of Carlos Nieto et al. Provisional Measures regarding Venezuela. Order of the Inter-American Court of January 26, 2009, Considering clause twenty.