6 14. In this sense, to adequately analyze the implementation of the provisional measures, the Court requests that in its submissions the representatives refer only to the beneficiaries that inhabit the veredas or settlements which are comprehended by the present measures, in conformity with Consideration 8 of the present Order. * * * 15. Regarding the measures adopted and the immediate implementation of those that are necessary for the effective protection of the life and the personal integrity of all members of the Peace Community of San José de Apartadó (hereinafter, “Peace Community”), (first operative paragraph of the Order of February 2008, supra Having Seen 1), the State reported, inter alia, that it had provided consistent training to the members of law enforcement in the area. Additionally, it referred to “tactical offensive measures” as well as “military control” and “neutralization,” carried out in the general area of the territory of San José de Apartadó, which the State considers “have generated the security conditions that are required for the inhabitants of this territory to freely exercise their rights.” Additionally, the State highlighted that various “Security Councils” had been organized. Regarding the behavior of the members of the National Army, the State notified that on “November 10, 11, and 12, 2009, it sent a verification commission to the area, with the goal of reviewing complaints about situations that affect the Community of San José de Apartadó, in response to the petition submitted by the Ministry of Defense to the General Inspector of the National Army due to facts alleged by the representative. During the public hearing (supra Having Seen 5), the State explained in detail that in said visit the complaints [presented by Mr. Javier Giraldo] were verified one by one, identifying the status of investigations and noting that the majority were under review of the Attorney General of the Nation in disciplinary procedures of the highest order. Additionally, it noted that it carried out a second visit from March 16 to March 22, 2010. Moreover, during the public hearing the State indicated that it had “redoubled action against delinquent groups in the area[, and that] it had captured 155 members of criminal gangs […].” 16. Additionally, the State reported that the National Government incorporated the territory of San José de Apartadó “as one of the areas subject to intervention by the Center for Coordination of Integral Action” [CCAI, for its name in Spanish]. The State pointed out that “[t]here are signs of improvement on different fronts, which is reflected in the return of displaced persons with the consequent repopulation of a high percentage of the urban sector of San José de Apartadó and its veredas, particularly those that are found near the municipal center of the territory; in the economic revitalization, demonstrated by the utilization of rural areas through the planting of different agricultural products, and also through the opening of new commercial establishments; and in the social investment represented by the rendering of health and education services by national, departmental, and local governments.” However, the State insisted that the principal flaws for the work that they must carry out in favor of the members of the Peace Community and those who use their services are: i) “lack of knowledge of the identity of the persons composing the Community”; ii) “lack of clear definition regarding in which places the members are situated, given that the only identification given as a point of agreement is ‘La Holandita’ ranch”; and iii) “lack of dialogue with the leaders and/or representatives of the Peace Community,” which impedes knowledge of “the threats that they face – in the moment that they are presented – making it difficult for the troops attempting to neutralize potential aggressors.” However, during the public hearing the State referred to its notification of the individualization of 136 families, beneficiaries of the provisional