it sets out the arguments and evidence for whether or not it considers that these measures should be maintained, in accordance with the request made in the reports it submitted on September 18, 2012, and May 20, 2013. The Court also considers it pertinent that Adrián Meléndez Quijano, as a beneficiary of the measures and also the representative of the other beneficiaries, and the Commission, submit observations on the information provided by the State. It is relevant that the State, the beneficiary, and the Commission present information and observations, as applicable, and specific considerations on the persistence of the situation that gave rise to the provisional measures in relation to each of the beneficiaries individually and, in this regard, on the connection with that situation of the different incidents described, and any they eventually indicate. In addition, they should present information and observations on the existence of domestic mechanisms that could be effective to ensure the safety of the beneficiaries. 29. Based on the above, the Court determines that it is in order to maintain in force these provisional measures in favor of Adrián Meléndez Quijano and his family members, for an additional period that will expire on June 30, 2014. Consequently, the Court will evaluate the maintenance of the measures in favor of the said beneficiaries in due course. C. Regarding Benjamín Cuéllar Martínez and Henry Paul Fino Solórzano 30. In his observations of June 20, 2012, Adrián Meléndez Quijano informed the Court that Benjamín Cuéllar Martínez, Director of the Human Rights Institute of the Universidad Centroamericana “José Simeón Cañas” (hereinafter “IDHUCA”), had informed him on June 15, 2012, that, “as of that date, the administrative and legal support that it had been providing [him by means of representation by himself and Henry Paul Fino Solórzano] had terminated.” Neither the Commission nor the State made any observations in this regard. 31. Based on the above, the Court considers it appropriate to lift the provisional measures adopted in favor of Benjamín Cuéllar Martínez and Henry Paul Fino Solórzano, who represented the beneficiaries through their work at IDHUCA. D. Regarding the presentation of State reports 32. It should be noted that, on different occasions, the State has been requested to present bi-monthly reports in the context of these provisional measures, and has failed to do so on a regular basis. Although the Court appreciates the fact that the State has responded to requests for information, the failure to present the reports on time has had an negative impact on this Court’s ability to assess the implementation of these measures and on El Salvador’s compliance with its obligations satisfactorily and, even, on the possibility of responding to the State’s requests with regard to the lifting of these measures (supra considering paragraph 14). 33. This Court recalls that the States Parties to the Convention that have accepted its contentious jurisdiction are bound to fulfill the obligations established by the Court. This duty includes the State’s obligation to inform the Court of the measures adopted to comply with the Court’s decisions in its rulings. 37 The obligation to provide information is a duty that, for effective fulfillment, requires the formal presentation of a document within the time frame, with specific, true, current and detailed information on the issues to which this 37 Cf. Case of Barrios Altos v. Peru. Monitoring compliance with judgment. Order of the Court November 17, 2004, seventh considering paragraph, and Case of Eloisa Barrios et al. Provisional measures with regard to Venezuela. Order of the Court of February 13, 2013, sixtieth considering paragraph. 14