2 September 24, 2004, argued that the State has not reported on any specific steps taken to guarantee the implementation of provisional measures; that the bills mentioned by the State have not been yet subject to legislative discussion and that legislators have recently expressed their reluctance towards abolition of the death penalty in Guatemala. 4. In its comments to the first State report, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Commission”) on October 1, 2004, held that it appreciates the steps taken by COPREDEH to promote legislative initiatives aimed at abolishing the death penalty in Guatemala, but that the bills announced by the Government have not yet been submitted to the legislative power and that the State failed to expressly report on the progress made to comply with the provisional measures ordered. 5. The communication of the Secretary of the Court (hereinafter “the Secretary”) of January 18, 2005, whereby, pursuant to the instructions of the President of the Court (hereinafter “the President”), the State was requested to submit its second report on the implementation of the provisional measures without delay. Said request was re-stated by the Secretary through the communication of March 7, 2005. 6. The second State report of March 11, 2005, whereby it was stated that the Secretary of the Presidency of the Judicial Authority notified the First and Second Judges of Criminal Sentence Execution that the aforementioned provisional measures were in force and should be taken into account not to enforce the judgment against the beneficiaries. 7. The comments of the representatives of April 14, 2005, to the second State report and its Appendixes, set forth that: a) the Forensic Medical Service of the Judicial Authority, after the request of the Second Judge of Criminal Sentence Execution, evaluated the health condition of Mr. Ronald Raxcacó-Reyes, verified that he suffers from muscular and chest pain, and determined that treatment could be covered by the medical center of the penitentiary, even though the beneficiary did not obtain satisfactory results at the center, and b) regarding the State’s refusal to take Mr. Raxcacó-Reyes to a hospital, the representatives succeeded in having a private medical examination carried out, which confirmed the aforementioned health conditions, including breathing problems, pain in the pericardial area upon palpation, movement limitations in the lumbar area, difficulty in performing push-ups and extensions of the spine and lower extremities. 8. The comments of the Commission of April 29, 2005, regarding the second State report, whereby it was argued that mere notice of the provisional measures to the First and Second Judges of Criminal Sentence Execution is not enough for the purposes of full compliance therewith. Consequently, said measures must be adopted through a judicial resolution issued by the respective jurisdictional authorities. Moreover, the Commission stated that there are sufficient grounds for the request of petitioners for the State to guarantee Mr. Raxcacó-Reyes a medical examination at a health facility other than that of the penitentiary.