-12- Ramírez-Hinostroza and his wife and daughters, it is concluded from the information given by the Commission and by Perú, that, before he traveled to the interior of the State, Mr. Ramírez-Hinostroza was protected by police guardsmen and was provided a bullet-proof vest (supra Having Seen clause Number 7.e). On February 1, 2006, the State filed the first one of the reports it has to produce every two months on its compliance with the provisional measures ordered by the Court, wherein, inter alia, it is reported that Mr. Ramírez-Hinostroza has returned to Lima, that he is afforded some protection measures and there is an investigation under way into the alleged attack the aforesaid party underwent on September 15, 2005 (supra Having Seen clause Number 12). However, on account of the fact that the observations to such report by the Commission and by Mr. Rivera-Paz are still pending, the Court does not have before it all the elements necessary to effect a thorough assessment of the protection measures the State would be providing. 16. That, according to the information given, Mr. Ramírez-Hinostroza considers it necessary, to implement adequate protection, for a vehicle to be provided him, something which has not been forthcoming. With respect to such matter, on October 13, 2005 the Ministerio de Justicia (Ministry of Justice) requested the Ministerio del Interior (Ministry of the Interior) and the Secretaría Permanente de la Comisión Nacional de Derechos Humanos (Permanent Secretariat of the National Commission for Human Rights) thereof that they step up the security afforded Mr. Luis Alberto Ramírez-Hinostroza, providing him with adequate means of transportation, a bulletproof vest and other measures “considering how serious the situation had become on account of the latest attack effected against him and in compliance with the provisions by the Court” (supra Having Seen clause Number 2.e). 17. That the Tribunal deems it essential for the State to implement and adopt, forthwith, in such manner as to be effective, all the measures necessary to protect the rights to life and to personal integrity of Mr. Ramírez-Hinostroza and his family, taking into consideration that even during the period when such measures and other injunctions were in force, Mr. Ramírez-Hinostroza would have sustained attacks against his life while he was out on the street. For such purpose, the State must take all pertinent steps so that the protection measures provided in the instant Order be planned with the beneficiaries thereof, their representatives and the Commission participating, in such manner as to effectively protect their life and integrity. * * * 18. That in its brief praying for provisional measures the Commission pointed out that, for the purpose of rendering Article 25(6) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court applicable, three lawyers from the Instituto de Defensa Legal (Institute for Legal Defense) (IDEELE), among which Mr. Rivera-Paz, would represent Mr. RamírezHinostroza before the Court. However, Mr. Rivera-Paz has informed the Court that the aforementioned lawyers from the aforesaid Institute no longer represent Mr. Luis Alberto Ramírez-Hinostroza and his family before the Court as a result of a “de facto replacement” of legal counsel in a domestic criminal action wherein the IDEELE was representing the aforesaid party (supra Having Seen clause Number 9.b). 19. That bearing in mind the particular characteristics of the situation of risk with which Mr. Ramírez-Hinostroza and his family are coping, and that they are doing without the representatives they initially had before the Court, this Tribunal deems it necessary for the adequate implementation of the measures that the Inter-American