maintain the protection ordered; if one of these has ceased to exist, the Court shall assess the appropriateness of continuing with the protection ordered. 3 3. Under international human rights law, provisional measures are not only preventive in the sense that they preserve a juridical situation, but they are also essentially protective because they protect human rights, inasmuch as they seek to avoid irreparable damage to persons. In this way, provisional measures become a real jurisdictional guarantee of a preventive nature. 4 4. By reason of its jurisdiction, in the context of provisional measures the Court cannot consider the merits of any argument that is not strictly associated with extreme gravity, urgency and the need to avoid irreparable damage to persons. Any other matter or argument may only be examined and decided upon during the consideration of the merits of a contentious case 5 or when monitoring compliance with the respective Judgment. 5. The Court notes that the provisional measures in relation to this matter were adopted in 1997. The Court ordered the protection of the members and offices of the Asociación de Familiares de Detenidos Desaparecidos de Colombia-ASFADDES (Association of Relatives of Detainees-Disappeared Persons of Colombia), a nongovernmental organization that brings together and supports the relatives of victims of forced disappearance in Colombia. The beneficiaries allegedly suffered threats, harassment, surveillance and demands for information by State security bodies in relation to their membership and activities in said organization. In May 1997, the Association closed its offices in Ocaña, due to severe harassment of its officials. On June 24, 1997 a bomb destroyed the premises and files of the ASFADDES office in the city of Medellín. After this bombing, the provisional measures were adopted. In subsequent years, it was alleged, inter alia, that the communications between members of ASFADDES were illegally intercepted, that two of its members who were beneficiaries of provisional measures were forcibly disappeared and that members of this organization suffered different types of alleged harassment, threats and intimidation which had driven some of them into exile. These events are related to a petition that is being processed before the Inter-American Commission, entitled “Members of ASFADDES, Case 11.764, Colombia.” In its brief of May 16, 2013, the Commission reported that the “initial petition regarding this matter was presented on June 27, 1997 […and] that in 2006 [the Commission] agreed to defer its admissibility until the decision was issued on the merits.” 6. In the last Order issued in 2008 (supra Having Seen 3), the Court analyzed the information provided between 2001 and the beginning of 2008 and ordered that the present measures be maintained, even though their scope was modified. Thus, while in 2001 there were 41 named beneficiaries, all members of ASFADDES, including persons who sought this organization’s support and all the offices of ASFADDES, the Order of 3 Cf. Case of Carpio Nicolle. Provisional Measures regarding Guatemala. Order of the Court of July 6, 2009, Considering para. 14, and Case 19 Tradesmen. Provisional Measures regarding Colombia. Order of the Court of June 26, 2012, Considering para. 22. 4 Cf. Case of the Newspaper “La Nación”. Provisional Measures regarding Costa Rica. Order of the Court of September 7, 2001, Considering para. 4, and Matter Mery Naranjo et al. Provisional Measures regarding Colombia. Order of the Court of March 4, 2011, Considering para. 5. 5 Cf. Matter of James et al. Provisional Measures regarding Trinidad and Tobago. Order of the Court of August 20, 1998, Considering para. 6, and Case Gutiérrez Soler. Provisional Measures regarding Colombia. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of November 27, 2007, Operative Paragraph 1. 3