14 situation shows that they act with a freedom that compromises the safety of the said witness. [...] Cabrera lives in Guatemala and immediately after the hearings of the Court returned to his home in that country. [...] Cabrera has requested the Commission to ask the Court to protect his life and personal safety. 66. In an Order of June 30, 1998, the President of the Court called on the State to adopt all necessary measures to ensure the personal safety of Santiago Cabrera López, “so that the Court may examine the pertinence of the provisional measures requested by the Commission.” 67. On August 21, 1998, the State presented to the Court the report requested in the Order of the President. In this brief, Guatemala stated that it had adopted measures to find Cabrera López and provide him with security in compliance with the said Order. 68. In a brief of August 25, 1998, the Commission requested the Court to expand the measures adopted in this case in order to provide protection also to Alfonso Cabrera Viagres, María Victoria López, Blanca Cabrera, Carmelinda Cabrera, Teresa Aguilar Cabrera, Olga Maldonado and Carlos Alfonso Cabrera. 69. In an Order of August 29, 1998, the Court adopted provisional measures, ratified the Order of the President of June 30 that year, and requested the State to maintain the necessary measures to protect the life and personal safety of Santiago Cabrera López and to adopt the necessary measures for the protection of Alfonso Cabrera Viagres, María Victoria López, Blanca Cabrera, Carmelinda Cabrera, Teresa Aguilar Cabrera, Olga Maldonado and Carlos Alfonso Cabrera. Furthermore, it called on Guatemala to investigate the facts and to report on the provisional measures it had taken every two months, and on the Inter-American Commission to forward its observations on these reports, within six weeks of receiving them. 70. When this judgment was pronounced, the State and the Inter-American Commission had presented their reports and their observations on these reports, respectively, in accordance with the Order of the Court of August 29, 1998. These provisional measures will be maintained while it is shown that the circumstances of extreme gravity and urgency that justified their adoption persist. VI DOMESTIC PROCEEDINGS 71. In continuation, the Court believes it necessary to refer to some domestic proceedings, the examination of which may help clarify the facts of the instant case (infra 121m). 72. On March 13, 1992, a corpse was removed from near the Ixcucua River and an autopsy was performed. The same day, in the presence of the Magistrate of Retalhuleu and of Captain Sosa Orellana, the body was “transferred to the morgue of the general cemetery of the city of Retalhuleu”. The Magistrate of Retalhuleu opened file No. 395-92 and examined the body that had been found. The description detailed features similar to those of Bámaca Velásquez. However, the autopsy that had been performed provided details of the dead man that did not coincide with either the physical characteristics of Efraín Bámaca Velásquez or with the cause of his death2. 2 Cf. Transcript of the reports of the Magistrate and the autopsy, which appear in case file No. 395-