2 The Commission added that should measures again be needed to protect the personal safety of Messrs. Guerrero and Páez, it would ask the Court to reinstate them; 5. The State’s ninth report, dated May 14, 1999, wherein it advised that: a. The Ministry of the Interior and the National Police had jointly examined a risk assessment done in the case of Mrs. Élida González Vergel with a view to instituting security measures on her behalf and the State would be informing the Court as soon as it had more details on the plan adopted for her; b. It had requested information from the competent authorities concerning the transfer of Mr. Gonzalo Arias Alturo and that information would be forwarded to the Court in due course; c. It had investigated Mrs. María Nodelia Parra’s complaints of wire tapping and telephone threats and found that no authority had ordered that her telephone line be tapped. The State further reported that it had urged the respective agents to take every measure necessary to protect Mrs. Parra and present a detailed accounting of the resources put toward the “security plan” intended for her protection; and d. It would be contacting the Colombian Commission of Jurists [Comisión Colombiana de Juristas] to enlist its cooperation in “designing” the protection measures ordered by the Court, and CONSIDERING: 1. That under Article 63(2) of the American Convention on Human Rights: In cases of extreme gravity and urgency, and when necessary to avoid irreparable damage to persons, the Court shall adopt such provisional measures as it deems pertinent in matters it has under consideration. With respect to a case not yet submitted to the Court, it may act at the request of the Commission. […]; 2. That in the instant case, judging from statements made by the State and by the Commission –the latter after consulting with the claimants on the matter-, the extremely grave and urgent situation that led to adoption of provisional measures for Messrs. Guillermo Guerrero Zambrano and Javier Páez no longer exists; 3. That the situation of Mrs. María Nodelia Parra, Mr. Gonzalo Arias Alturo and Mrs. Élida González Vergel is still one of such extreme gravity and urgency as to warrant continuation of the provisional measures that the Court requested for their protection. Moreover, in the opinion of this Court, in light of the information available concerning the situation of Mr. Arias Alturo and Mrs. González Vergel, a thorough evaluation of the current status of the protective measures adopted by the State on their behalf is imperative; and 4. That the State has indicated its willingness to work toward creating mechanisms that would enable the claimants to participate in some of the decisions related to implementation of the protective measures ordered by the Court,