-7certain compensatory amounts to Messrs. Salomón Flórez-Contreras and Luis José Pundor-Quintero and Ana Diva Quintero-Quintero de Pundor. 13. That, upon examination of the facts and circumstances that were the basis for the Order of the President dated April 28, 2005, extending the scope of the measures to three beneficiaries and their families (supra Having Seen clause No. 6), and the averments of the representatives (supra Having Seen clauses No. 3 and 4), the Court finds it appropriate to ratify the President’s decision on the grounds that the information submitted does reveal, prima facie, that Messrs. Salomón FlórezContreras and Luis José Pundor-Quintero and Ana Diva Quintero-Quintero de Pundor, as well as their respective families, are in a situation of extreme gravity and urgency as their lives and personal integrity have been threatened and are at serious risk. The application of the prima facie standard in a given case and the use of presumptions on account of the need to secure protection have led the President and the Court to order measures on several occasions in the past.6 14. That, since the State has failed to submit the report required under operative paragraph number six of the aforementioned Order of the President extending the scope of the measures, and the representatives have also failed to submit the information requested under operative paragraph number three thereof (supra Having Seen clauses No. 6, 8 and 9), the Court does not have any information regarding the measures that Colombia may have adopted to comply with the President’s Order, nor does it have up-to-date information on the current situation of the beneficiaries. 15. That, given the legal nature of urgent measures and provisional measures, which are aimed at preventing irreparable damage to persons in situations of extreme gravity and urgency, the Court would like to insist on the particular importance of the information provided by the State, as well as the information that the Commission and the beneficiaries’ representatives may submit on the subject. In this regard, as the President was forced to insist on the need for the State and the beneficiaries’ representatives to submit the required information regarding both the scope extension and the provisional measures ordered for the benefit of Sandra Belinda Montero and her family (supra Having Seen clauses No. 8 and 9), the Court finds it necessary to note that such information is essential to find out about the current situation of the beneficiaries and, as the case may be, to assess the implementation of measures by the State. 16. That under Article 63(2) of the Convention, the adoption of such provisional measures as may be ordered by this Tribunal is mandatory for the State, since the fundamental principle of the law on international responsibility of the State, as supported by international case law, mandates that States should comply with their contractual obligations in good faith (pacta sunt servanda). THEREFORE: 6 Cf. Matter of Yare I and Yare II Capital Region Penitentiary Center (Yare Prison). Provisional Measures. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human rights of March 30, 2006, Considering clause No. 20; Matter of Monagas Judicial Confinement Center (“La Pica”). Urgent Measures. Order of the President of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of January 13, 2006, Considering clause No. 16; and Matter of Children Deprived of Liberty in the “Complexo do Tatuapé” of FEBEM. Provisional Measures. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of November 30, 2005, Considering clause No. 22.