12 State. However, the Commission “request[ed] the Court to order the State to present precise information in that regard"; j) “it is important to agree on mechanisms to facilitate the visits of the representatives and civil society organizations to detention centers, so as to favor the social control regarding the confinement conditions of the people imprisoned in Venezuela", and k) “the three elements of the Convention that determine [the maintenance of] the provisional measures are latent" and in the specific cases, the adoption of the measures is particularly "useful [...] to overcome conditions or situations of violence which, otherwise, could not be solved by the methods provided by the State and to create security conditions for life". 14. That the main purpose of the adoption of the provisional measures in these four matters is the effective protection of the life and personal integrity of the beneficiaries (supra Having Seen clauses 1 to 4). In this regard, it spring from the information furnished by the parties that, after a year and a half and three years and a half since the adoption of the provisional measures in the four penitentiary centers, there still exist violent acts ending in hundreds of deads and injured people (supra Considering clauses 11.a and 12.a). Moreover, the prison conditions imposed are contrary to the protection of integrity and dignity of the beneficiaries of said measures. 15. That the situation of extreme gravity and urgency has not been denied by the State. Likewise, the State has not requested the rescission or modification of the provisional measures ordered in the four matters of reference. On the contrary, the State presented official figures and information that confirm the existence of high levels of violence, which have caused several deaths and the infringement on the personal integrity of the inmates in the penitentiary cases under question (supra Considering clause 11a). 16. That the Commission and, particularly, the representatives have presented sufficient evidence and arguments leading this Tribunal to reasonable believe that there is still a situation of extreme gravity and urgency that justifies the maintenance of these provisional measures, in order to avoid irreparable damage to the life and integrity of the beneficiaries. 17. That, taking into account that the State undertook, at the public hearing, to overcome the current prison situation within a reasonable term of "five years" and, in view of the efforts made, so far, by Venezuela in this regard, this Tribunal considers it is convenient to maintain the provisional measures in favor of the beneficiaries of the four penitentiary centers in force, so as not to report, any longer, violent facts leading to deaths or injuries of the people under arrest that, as such, are subject to the State’s control, who also has to play a special role of guarantor in relation to them. 18. That even though this Tribunal is aware of the fact that the problem of confinement centers in general, and of Venezuela in particular, requires medium and long term actions in order to adapt its conditions to international standards, the States are obliged to implement prompt actions to guarantee the physical, psychological and moral integrity of inmates, as well as their right to life and to enjoy the minimum conditions of a dignified life8. 8 Cf. Matter of Monagas Judicial Confinement Center (“La Pica”). Provisional Measures regarding Venezuela. Order of the Inter-American Court of February 9, 2006, Considering clause nineteen.