13 to the minimum conditions of a dignified life, especially in the case of children, who require special attention on the part of the State.4 13. That the Court considers that it is necessary that the State implements and adopts, immediately and effectively, all the necessary measures to guarantee the total exercise of the rights to life and personal integrity of the detainees within Tatuapé Complex, so that facts as those described above are not repeated. The adoption by the State of certain protection measures is not enough: it is also required that the latter and their implementation are efficient. * 14. That the State pointed out that in order to analyze the validity of the provisional measures, the previous exhaustion of domestic jurisdiction remedies is indispensable (supra Having Seen clause No. 5). On that matter, the Court understands that, considering the nature itself of the provisional measures (supra Having Seen clause No. 7), it is not possible to subject the protection of human rights at serious and urgent risk to the requirement of exhaustion of domestic remedies. * 15. That the representatives have informed that they face several difficulties to enter the confinement units of Tatuapé Complex. 16. The State must take every step so that the protection measures are planned and implemented with the representatives’ participation and, in general, it must keep them informed on the progress of their implementation. 17. That the State must protect and respect the functions that can be exercised by non-governmental organizations and other groups or individuals defending the human rights and fundamental liberties of the people deprived of liberty, as these constitute a positive and supplementary contribution to the efforts made by the State.5 * 18. That the representatives requested the extension of the provisional measures in favor of Mrs. Conceição Paganele, based on the alleged acts of duress, criminal investigations, public accusations and life threats against her. The Commission supported that request, but the State, on the other hand, requested its rejection for lack of evidence. 19. That the representatives claimed that in November, 2005, certain civil servants presented accusations through the press, accusing human rights 4 Cf. Matter of Yare I and Yare II Capital Region Penitentiary Center. Provisional Measures, supra note 1, Considering clause No. 17; Matter of Monagas Judicial Confinement Center ("La Pica"). Provisional Measures, supra note 1, Considering clause No. 19; Matter of Children Deprived of Liberty in the "Complexo do Tatuapé" of FEBEM. Provisional Measures, supra note 1, Considering clause No. 18. Cf. Matter of Monagas Judicial Confinement Center ("La Pica"). Provisional Measures, supra note 1, Considering clause No. 14. 5