8 there are 11 other child beneficiaries who are protected by the provisional measures required by the Court in its Order of November 26, 2010. When the Inter-American Commission requested the expansion of the measures to include those children in 2010, it did not request that their names be kept confidential; consequently, their names were made public in the said Order of November 26, 2010. In this regard, the Court concurs with the decision made by its President, and considers it desirable not to disclose the names of these 11 child beneficiaries in this Order, based on the Commission’s current request and to require the latter and the representatives to advise the Court of their views on this issue for the purposes of any subsequent orders. 8. In its Order of November 26, 2010, the Court monitored the implementation of the present provisional measures in favor of the beneficiaries at that time. In the present Order, the Court will analyze exclusively the request to expand the provisional measures in the following order: (i) with regard to the beneficiaries’ next of kin and (ii) with regard to the representatives of the beneficiaries. It will also consider the representatives’ request for a hearing (infra considering paragraphs 26 to 28). 9. The present request to expand the provisional measures is not related to any contentious case currently before the Court, but rather originated from a request for precautionary measures lodged with the Inter-American Commission. The Court has no information to show whether the facts currently before it form part of contentious proceedings before the inter-American system, or whether a petition concerning the merits has been filed before the Inter-American Commission that relates to this request. 10. On previous occasions, the Court has interpreted the phrase “matters not yet submitted to it,” contained in Article 63(2) of the Convention, to mean that there is at least a possibility that the matter underlying the request for provisional measures may be submitted to the Court’s contentious jurisdiction. For this minimal possibility to exist, the procedure set forth in Articles 44 and 46 to 48 of the Convention must have been initiated before the Commission.7 11. The Court has considered it necessary to clarify that, given the protective nature of provisional measures (supra fifth considering paragraph), exceptionally, it may order them even when a contentious case has not been filed before the inter-American system, in situations that, prima facie, may have a serious and urgent effect on human rights.8 To this end, it is necessary to assess the problem at issue, the effectiveness of the State’s actions regarding the situation, and the degree of vulnerability of the persons for whom the measures are requested should they not be adopted. Therefore, the InterAmerican Commission must present sufficient justification in relation to the said criteria, and the State must not have demonstrated clearly and sufficiently the effectiveness of any measures it has taken at the domestic level.9 12. Article 63(2) of the Convention requires that, for the Court to order provisional measures, three conditions must be present: (i) “extreme gravity”; (ii) “urgency,” and 7 Cf. Matter of García Uribe et al. Provisional measures with regard to Mexico. Order of the InterAmerican Court of February 2, 2006, third and fourth considering paragraphs; Matter of Alvarado Reyes et al. Provisional measures with regard to Mexico. Order of the Inter-American Court of November 26, 2010, thirtyfirst considering paragraph, and Matter of José Luis Galdámez Álvarez et al. Provisional measures with regard to Honduras. Order of the Inter-American Court of February 22, 2011, ninth considering paragraph. 8 Cf. Matter of the Capital Detention Center El Rodeo I and El Rodeo II. Provisional measures with regard to Venezuela. Order of the Inter-American Court of February 8, 2008, ninth considering paragraph; Matter of María Lourdes Afiuni. Provisional measures with regard to Venezuela. Order of the President of the Inter-American Court of December 10, 2010, seventh considering paragraph, and Matter of the Socioeducational Detention Unit. Provisional measures with regard to Brazil. Order of the Inter-American Court of February 25, 2011, sixth considering paragraph. 9 Cf. Matter of the Capital Detention Center El Rodeo I and El Rodeo II, supra note 8, ninth considering paragraph; Matter of María Lourdes Afiuni, supra note 8, seventh considering paragraph, and Matter of the Socio-educational Detention Unit, supra note 8, sixth considering paragraph.