a) It is the Commission’s responsibility to prove the “factual connection” between the new facts and the events that justified the adoption of provisional measures, so that the Court may order the expansion, for which it referred to the role of human rights defender of the proposed beneficiary, as well as assessing the criteria of extreme gravity and urgency and the need to avoid irreparable damage in the specific case; b) The facts provided would prove that there is a clear intention to affect the work of Marianela Sánchez Ortiz as a human rights defender, and that these threatening actions must be analyzed in relation to an intimidating pattern against human rights defenders in Venezuela in general, and towards the activity of the Venezuelan Prisons Observatory, in particular. The Commission notes that, from examining the provided information, it would follow that the alleged situation of Marianela Sanchez Ortiz being followed, her husband having been threatened and the recent act of harassment, are directly related to her acting as human rights defender and, in particular, to her active participation and public exposure for the denunciation of human rights violations of detainees in Venezuela. Furthermore, the tone of the threats would have an intimidating effect, the purpose of which would be to terminate the work that Mrs. Sánchez Ortizis is involved in, of documenting and denouncing these violations, and this would also affect the activities carried out by the organization where she works; c) The present situation would be framed within a specific context, in which members of the Venezuelan Prisons Observatory have been threatened and harassed in retaliation for the work they do in Venezuela, regarding the situation of detainees, and which the Commission has monitored. The risk factors in the case of Marianela Sánchez Ortiz and her family, related to the work at the Venezuelan Prisons Observatory and her public exposure due to the denunciations made by this organization, would be similar to the ones established in the case of Humberto Prado, which led to the adoption of provisional measures in his favor; d) The request for the expansion of provisional measures on this occasion is not only based on the context of attacks against human rights defenders in Venezuela but also, and mainly, on specific recent and individualized facts which emphasize a situation of real and immediate danger for the proposed beneficiary and her family; e) The following and death threat would have occurred after the violent events that took place at “La Planta” prison and the content of the aggressions would have had a direct connection to her work of denouncing these events and the state of the prison system. The threats, the way in which they were carried out and their content, define the security status of Marianela Sánchez Ortiz as grave and subject to imminent danger. Furthermore, according to the Commission, “this threat would represent a death warning” for Marianela Sánchez Ortiz. f) Despite the fact that the threats were reported to the competent authorities, no investigation was initiated and no information was provided proving that the authorities had adopted measures to protect the proposed beneficiary or clarify the facts and identify those allegedly responsible; g) The alleged following and threats would constitute as acts against the life and personal integrity of the alleged beneficiaries and, in particular, would try to silence and interfere with the work of Mrs. Sanchez Ortiz in the defense of human rights, also affecting her right to freedom of expression. In addition, the exposed facts would present sufficient elements to conclude that they are connected to the activities carried out by Mrs. Sanchez Ortiz in her capacity as a human rights defender and main member of the organization, which is a representative in the provisional measures related to the matters of Venezuelan prisons. 5