b) c) d) e) f) g) This was communicated to the Secretary of Security, who indicated that he would inform local police authorities; on December 31, 2008, while Mr. Andino was selling, a young man apparently belonging to a gang drew near and stated that “he was being paid very well to get rid of him, but that he was thinking about it because it was not going to be easy to end his life due to the fact that [Dencen Andino] was well-known.” On January 8, 2009, this event was denounced before the General Office for Criminal Investigations (hereinafter, “DGIC” for its acronym in Spanish); on January 5, 2009, an agent of the DGIC “tried to urgently locate Mr. Dencen Andino on two occasions.” When he found Mr. Andino, the agent indicated that he had an arrest warrant and that Mr. Andino should follow him immediately. Mr. Andino asked to see the warrant but the agent refused, and thus the beneficiary stated that he would later turn himself in voluntarily; on January 7, 2009, Mr. Andino ran into the same DGIC agent on the street. The latter again insisted that Mr. Andino go to the Public Prosecutor’s Office, but this time, it was for the purpose of “confronting” one of the persons involved in the events that occurred to Mrs. Kawas Fernández; on January 8, 2009, Mr. Andino spoke with the Chief of the GOIC in order to inform him that an agent of that institution had stated that an arrest warrant had been issued for his capture. However, this agent did not appear despite the fact that he had been summoned by his Chief. Thus, Mr. Andino and his representatives contacted an agent of the Public Prosecutor’s Office, who indicated that no arrest warrant had been issued for Mr. Andino’s capture; on June 1, 2009, a police officer involved in the obstruction of the investigation into the events that occurred to Mrs. Kawas Fernández threatened Mr. Dencen Andino’s life while at his place of work. The representatives highlighted that this occurred after the police officer guarding Mr. Andino had left, in breach of the schedule that had been established. The representatives also indicated that Mr. Andino had stated that he had seen that same police officer speaking to the person that threatened him on various occasions. Furthermore, they indicated that one of the witnesses to this event had refused to testify because an agent of the GOIC had told him “not to get involved in that because he would only get problems,” and on November 13, 2009, while walking close to the central part of the City of Tela, Mr. Andino was approached by the police agent that had threatened his life, who told him that he needed to speak with him in private. Mr. Andino refused, and the police official responded in a threatening tone, “we’ll see each other then.” The representatives indicated that the police official that guarded him witnessed this; however, he did not intervene in order to protect the beneficiary’s integrity. 12. Initially, the Inter-American Commission took note “of the commitments assumed by the State under the agreements subscribed on December 13, 2008 and January 16, 2009,” but expressed concern that Mr. Andino still had not been included in the witness protection program and that he had not received a bulletproof vest. Additionally, in relation to the implementation of Mr. Andino’s police protection, the Commission recommended that a “mechanism for controlling presence and schedules, […] signed by the beneficiary and indicating his police escort’s time of arrival and departure,” be established. Later, the Commission indicated that it “consider[ed] important that ways of resolving the difficulties in providing protection and the most appropriate mechanisms of protection after the beneficiary change[d] homes [be agreed upon].” Additionally, it considered that the State had to ensure that “the persons in charge of guarding the beneficiary [did] not have any links” to 6