9 information of extreme gravity and urgency to avoid irreparable damage to life and physical integrity of the beneficiary. The above was repeated at the private hearing. 26. That with regard to Mr. Luis Roberto Romero-Rivera, the representatives expressed that he was an attorney in the case of Mack-Chang, but that due to his present capacity as official at the office of the Human Rights Ombudsman, he may use other institutional mechanisms of protection. During the private hearing the representatives repeated the above and added that if Mr. Luis Roberto RomeroRivera wanted to be awarded provisional measures through the Inter-American Commission they would not contest such an initiative. 27. As to the situation of Mr. Luis Roberto Romero-Rivera, the Commission referred to what had been pointed out by the State and by the representatives, but it made no reference to the maintenance or the withdrawal of the measures Ordered in his favor. 28. On that respect, the Court observes that in Considering Clauses 22 and 23 of the Order of January 26, 2009, the representatives and the Commission were asked to provide accurate information in Order to evidence facts of extreme gravity and urgency which could represent an imminent risk directly related with the facts which gave rise to the granting of the measures in Order to evaluate the enforcement thereof. However, the Court notices that from the information forwarded by the State and the representatives in their briefs, as well as at the private hearing, the parties coincide that in the last seven years there have not been any situations, which may presume the existence of a risk for the beneficiary. Added to the above, at present the beneficiary works as legal advisor at the office of the Human Rights Ombudsman, reason for which, as pointed out by the parties, he would have access to other protection measures. 29. That from all the above, it can be concluded that from the enforcement of these provisional measures no episodes of threats have been evidenced against Mr. Luis Roberto Romero-Rivera. In view of that, the Court considers it reasonable to presume that the situation of extreme gravity, urgency and imminent risk which gave rise to the adoption of the provisional measures to protect the life and physical integrity of the beneficiary no longer exists, reason for which his situation is no longer framed within the requirements set forth in Article 63(2) of the Convention. Therefore, the Court considers it pertinent to withdraw the abovementioned provisional measures. 30. That from the Considering clauses abovementioned (supra Considering clauses 17 to 29) it is stated that from the currency of the present provisional measures, there has not been any incidents directly related to the beneficiaries of these measures in relation to Jorge Guillermo Lemus Alvarado and his next of kin, and Luis Roberto Romero Rivera. The Court deemed it reasonable to consider that the situation regarding said beneficiaries no longer frames within the settings pointed in Article 63(2) of the Convention.13 13 Cf. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez. Provisional Measures regarding Honduras. Order of the Court of January 15, 1988. Considering clause 3; Matter of the “El Nacional” and “Así es la Noticia” newspapers, supra note 4, Considering clause 39, and Matter of Leonor Rivero et al., supra note 4, Considering clause 4.