10 a) the State should submit specific information about the representatives’ allegation that “Mr. [Berson] Gelim’s safe-conduct was destroyed and Mr. Gelim was sent to Haiti were he had to stay until he was allowed to return to the Dominican Republic thanks to the intercession of a Human Rights NGO, and that Mr. [Janty] Fils-Aime presumably faced a similar situation”; b) it is disturbing “that the State expressed […] the need for Ms. [Solain Pie or Solain Pierre or Solange Pierre] to file a ‘formal and serious’ complaint for it to begin its investigations”. Although beneficiaries are called to collaborate with the elucidation of the facts, “in no case should [they] be charged with the responsibility of the commencement or efficacy of the investigation that [the State] should foster” and “the proceedings before the Court constitute sufficient grounds to begin the corresponding investigations”; c) the State must oversee the effective implementation of the measures of protection in favor of Ms. Solain Pie or Solain Pierre or Solange Pierre’s children, who, out of fear of the threats they received, are out of their country, and must “remove any obstacles that may hinder the implementation of their protection”; d) it is disturbing that fear for Father Pedro Ruquoy’s life resulted in his leaving the country, after 30 years of residing there, mainly in light of the threats he received recently; e) it is necessary for the State to oversee the effective implementation of the measures ordered in this case and to submit “specific, accurate, up-to-date and detailed [information] pertaining to its duty to protect Ms. [Solain Pie or Solain Pierre or Solange Pierre’s] children, as well as to the matter giving rise to and effectiveness to the protection requested for all beneficiaries”; f) the State must be called upon to adopt, forthwith, such steps as may be necessary to ensure the efficacy of the measures. In particular, it requested that the State should restore the safe-conducts to those who had them destroyed, considering the vulnerability they face for not having said documents; g) it is necessary for the State to “submit information about whatever investigations it conducts and the implementation of the provisional measures, in light of persistent public information on mass deportations or ‘repatriation’ processes of people of Haitian origin or descent”, and h) “it insists on the fact that the requirement to create an adequate mechanism to coordinate and supervise the measures [so that they are planned and implemented with the participation of beneficiaries or their representatives] remains unfulfilled”. 10. The briefs of the representatives forwarded on October 25, November 4 and December 16, 2005, wherein they stated, inter alia, that: a) they acknowledge that safe-conducts were given to the persons mentioned by the State in its report;