-4- National Commission for Human Rights) of the Ministerio del Interior (Ministry of the Interior), to Mr. Carlos Rivera-Paz and to Mr. Luis Alberto RamírezHinostroza. In said official notes the aforementioned Secretaría Ejecutiva (Office of the Executive Secretary) expressed that “the [p]rovisional [m]easures ordered by the Court […] in favor of Luis Alberto RamírezHinostroza, his next of kin and [the] lawyer Carlos Rivera-Paz, cannot be suspended nor held to have expired by the sole expression of the will of he who is one of the beneficiaries of the aforesaid protection measures[, as well as that] the security and protection measures must be maintained.” 5. The brief of November 9, 2005, whereby the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Commission”) put forward its observations to the report by the State dated October 21, 2005 and its Appendixes (supra Having Seen clause Number 2). It was therein pointed out that: a) as regards the measures necessary to protect the life and the personal integrity of the beneficiaries, the fact that, since September, 2004, Mr. Ramírez-Hinostroza would have been subjected to two attacks against his life in June and in September, 2005 is of paramount importance; b) the language employed by the State in its report may be held to be ambiguous, for it avoids to “identify what kind of steps are those taken, which are the authorities undertaking the procedures, before whom they are proceeding, [and] how are the restrictions imposed under Law No. 27378 establishing benefits for effective collaboration in the field of organized crime”; c) with regard to Mr. Carlos Rivera-Paz, it prayed the Court to expressly request the State to comply with the measures. On the matter, it pointed out that the State has not complied with such duty, because Mr. Rivera-Paz does not qualify as an “effective collaborator in the terms of the Law”; d) it considered it meet that the protection measures ordered in favor of Mr. Luis Alberto Ramírez-Hinostroza, his family and his lawyer be maintained and that their effectiveness be assessed; and e) it prayed the Court to call upon the State to pursue an earnest and effective investigation regarding the attack which took place on September 15, 2005 to the detriment of Mr. Ramírez-Hinostroza and to further the investigations related to the events which took place on August 30, 2004 and June 1, 2005. 6. The note of November 11, 2005, whereby the Secretariat of the Court (hereinafter “the Secretariat”), following instructions by the President, informed the representatives that the Court would assess the situation with which Mr. RamírezHinostroza had to cope and would decide on the possibility of lifting the provisional measures, bearing in mind the extreme gravity and the urgency that led the Tribunal to adopt the aforesaid measures. Likewise, it informed that the President deemed it essential for the Inter-American Commission and the representatives of the beneficiaries to send the Court, no later than November 19, 2005, their opinion on the possibility of lifting the measures totally. They were required to make reference to each of the beneficiaries thereof and to inform whether they had communicated