2 “persons who apparently run the risk of some kind of danger, waive or refuse to accept the protection of the State.” 4. The observations of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Commission” or “the Inter-American Commission”) of October 15, 1998, stating: a) that Islena Rey Rodriguez ignores the suggestions and recommendations of her escorts, due to the existence of irregularities such as sudden changes in the personnel or the vehicle used to escort her being out of service. b) that Mariela de Giraldo and her daughters, Sara and Natalia Giraldo, have not accepted the protection of the State because the latter has not offered them the option of choosing “alternative protection methods with the participation of officials who are not under suspicion.” c) that “it urges” the State to talk with the beneficiaries in order to reach an agreement allowing the adoption of measures that effectively and logically protect these persons whose personal integrity is threatened. d) that “there has been no effective investigation leading to the prosecution of those who took (sic) the life of Josué Giraldo and continue to threaten the persons who work with the El Meta Human Rights Committee.” CONSIDERING: 1. that That Article 63.2 of the American Convention of Human Rights establishes [I]n cases of extreme gravity and urgency, and when necessary to avoid irreparable damage to persons, the Court shall adopt such provisional measures as it deems pertinent in matters it has under consideration. With respect to a case not yet submitted to the Court, it may act at the request of the Commission. 2. That although Sister Noemy Palencia has stated that she does not require protection measures because she is in Bogotá, Colombia, the State should maintain the measures taken in her favor in order to make them effective when she is in the Department of El Meta. 3. That, with regard to the situation of Islena Rey Rodriguez, Mariela de Giraldo and her two minor daughters, “a situation of extreme gravity and urgency” persists that justifies maintaining the provisional measures adopted in their favor by this Court. 4. That, although Mariela Giraldo and her two daughter have not accepted the protection offered by the State, the State has only offered the protection of the General Directorate of Special Matters, which these persons mistrust, so that a discussion is necessary in order to reach an agreement. 5. That the reports of the State do not refer to the investigation or punishment of those responsible for the facts that motivated the adoption of the provisional measures.