6 8(2)(d), 8(2)(g) (Right to a Fair Trial); 25(1) (Judicial Protection); 13 (Freedom of Thought and Expression) and 24 (Right to Equal Protection) of the American Convention, to the detriment of Alfredo López-Álvarez, in relation to the general duty to respect and guarantee rights and liberties as set forth in Article 1(1) thereof, as well as for the violation of Article 5(1) (Right to Humane Treatment) of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) thereof, to the detriment of Teresa ReyesReyes, Alfa Barauda López-Reyes, Suamein Alfred López-Reyes, Gustavo Narciso López-Reyes, Alfred Omaly López-Suazo, Deikel Yanell López-Suazo, Iris Tatiana López-Bermúdez, José Álvarez-Martínez, Joseph López-Harolstohn, José Jaime Reyes-Reyes, María Marcelina Reyes-Reyes, Apolonia Álvarez-Aranda, Catarino López, Alba Luz García-Álvarez, Rina Maribel García-Álvarez, Marcia Migdalia GarcíaÁlvarez, Mirna Suyapa García-Álvarez, and Joel Enrique García-Álvarez. 13. That the Court notes that in view of the foregoing, and in light of the purpose of the provisional measures and the facts described in the case of López-Álvarez which gave rise to the request for the adoption of the above-mentioned measures, as well as of the Judgment rendered in said case, it does not follow that the alleged threats and harassment described by the representatives and the Commission and allegedly committed to the detriment of the beneficiaries in connection with their work in the defense of the rights of the Garifuna community of “Triunfo de la Cruz” over their ancestral lands have a direct bearing on the facts which prompted the adoption of provisional measures. 14. That the Court notes that the beneficiaries of the above-mentioned provisional measures and the State have reached an agreement within the framework of such measures. It is also to be noted that the State has complied with its duty to inform the Court about the measures adopted, from which it follows that it is willing to allow the beneficiaries to take part in the adoption of such measures. 15. That, additionally, the Court has taken cognizance of the information provided by the Inter-American Commission in its communication of August 18, 2006, wherein it pointed out that case No. 12.548 (Garifuna community of Triunfo de la Cruz and its members), as well as precautionary measure No. 253-05 (Community of Triunfo de la Cruz) are being processed before the Commission, in relation to facts which, in accordance with the Commission, have a bearing on these provisional measures. 16. That when determining the adoption of provisional measures, the Court may not consider the merits of any arguments pertaining to issues other than those which relate strictly to the situation of extreme gravity and urgency and the need to avoid irreparable damage to persons. Such other issues may only be brought before the Court through contentious cases or requests for advisory opinions.6 17. That in view of the foregoing, and taking into consideration that from the information requested to the parties it does not follow that the situation of extreme gravity and urgency persists in relation to the purpose of these provisional measures, the Court deems it relevant to lift the protection measures adopted in behalf of Alfredo López-Álvarez and Teresa Reyes-Reyes. 6 Cf. Matter of James et al. Provisional Measures regarding Trinidad and Tobago. Order of the Court of August 20, 1998, Considering clause 6; Matter of Leonel Rivero et al., supra note 2, Considering clause 17; and Matter of Children Deprived of Liberty in the “Complexo do Tatuapé” of FEBEM. Provisional Measures regarding Brazil. Order of the Court of November 25, 2008, Considering clause 13.