9. Regarding the situation of risk in the Urso Branco Prison, the representatives of the beneficiaries observed, among other aspects, that: a) “Twenty-seven officials per shift “is evidently insufficient for the prison population of around 700 inmates”; b) The precarious detention conditions “are aggravated by the threats, attacks, coercion and other arbitrary acts perpetrated by some prison’s officials against the inmates. As a whole, these detention conditions contribute to an unsafe, inhuman and degrading environment, which increases the probability of violence within the unit”; c) The substitution of the Rapid Intervention Group by the Special Operations Command of the Military Police “does not solve the problems, since many of the problems observed with regard to the [Rapid Intervention Group] apply also to the actions of the [Special Operations Command] within the prison,” and d) Due to the lack of adequate medical attention, the detainees with treatable illnesses are forced to live in pain. Food is often in bad condition, and access to hygiene products is always insufficient for basic needs. On visiting days, family members are submitted to humiliating searches and marital visits are carried out in unhygienic places. 10. Among other considerations, the Inter-American Commission observed that the State “had not presented precise information on the number of agents in the prison, or on the overpopulation”, or the prison’s total capacity. In addition, Brazil “had not indicated the measures it would be adopting to substitute the military officials with prison agents definitively, [and] the ratio between inmates and security agents would continue to be clearly disproportionate, which implies a serious inadequacy as regards the measures necessary to safeguard the life and personal integrity of those who are imprisoned.” Additionally, it observed that the information provided in relation to the remodeling of “the cells is insufficient to determine their current condition,” and it was unclear what impact the construction of new prisons in Rondônia would have on reducing the population detained in Urso Branco “to a level that was adequate and proportionate to the space available, the personnel assigned, the food supply, the medical services, and other benefits for the beneficiaries.” 11. The President recalls that, since the Court adopted the order of November 25, 2009, it has been informed of the death of a detainee, other acts of violence, and also alleged harassment and threats against some beneficiaries. Moreover, the Inter-American Court has been informed of different measures adopted by the authorities. However, the parties disagree as to the implementation and effectiveness of the measures of protection ordered at the domestic level. Based on the above and on the time that has elapsed since the Court issued the last order, the President considers it appropriate to receive updated and detailed information on the status of the implementation of these provisional measures at a public hearing, together with the arguments of the State, the representatives, and the InterAmerican Commission on the possible persistence of the situation of extreme gravity and urgency that resulted in the adoption and continuation of the said measures in favor of the beneficiaries, in order to evaluate the need to maintain them in force. 12. Finally, the President notes that the case has been before the Inter-American Commission since June 5, 2002. According to the information provided to the Court by the Commission on August 28, 2007, “case No 12,568, Persons Deprived of Liberty in the Urso 5