organization has required that the protective measures be collective in nature,” and i) requested that the Court: i) specify the scope of the Order of the Acting President of May 2, 2014 to the CIJP, “since that organization continues to address the issue collectively”; ii) urge the petitioner organization and the proposed beneficiary to agree to direct dialogue with the National Protection Unit, the institution that is responsible for the implementation of the emergency procedures in favor of Mr. Danilo Rueda, and iii) “analyze the appropriateness of granting the provisional measures requested in favor of Mr. Danilo Rueda, considering the State's willingness to individually address the protection of the proposed recipient as part of the precautionary measures granted in favor of the organization of the which he is a member [...]. " 10. The brief of May 16, 2014, wherein the State filed additional information before the Tribunal. By way of said brief, it noted that: a) “on May 13, [2014 ...] a follow up and consultation meeting regarding compliance with the Order issued on May 2, 2014 by [standing] President of the [...] Court [...] in favor of [...] Danilo Rueda, member of the InterChurch Justice and Peace Commission took place.” In this regard, it noted that the "meeting was attended by [...] Danilo Rueda, the [CIJP], the National Protection Unit, the Ministry of Defense, the National Police, and the Foreign Ministry. According to the State, at that meeting “the petitioner organization and the proposed beneficiary expressed their disagreement regarding the State’s statement in the report of May 9, 2014, which stated that the petitioners have not provided the channels for dialogue. In this regard, they noted that it is not due to unwillingness, rather they consider[ed] that there are some channels with the [...] Court [...] and understand that it corresponds to the Foreign Ministry to convene interagency meetings and not the National Protection Unit.” Moreover, the State indicated that “the Foreign Ministry is the communication channel,” however, it clarified that “this does not impede the petitioners and beneficiaries, in urgent situations, to come in direct contact with the National Protection Unit, the National Police, or other competent authority [...] "; b) “at the meeting, the National Protection Unit promised to implement within the emergency procedure: [...] one (1) armored vehicle, two (2) armed guards, means of communication and bulletproof vests.” Similarly, with regard to the fuel needed for Mr. Danilo Rueda’s transportation, “it was agreed that if [his] transportation costs [...] are higher than those costs established in the norms [sic], the National Protection Unit must be informed 72 hours in advance, so that the entity can implement the procedures in order to respond to the request.” In addition, it was agreed that “independent of the emergency procedure, a Risk Level Assessment of the proposed beneficiary would commence.” In addition, the National Protection Unit had promised that once the property of [Mr. Danilo Rueda’s] home and headquarters of the organization had been confirmed [...], a study of the installations would commence in order to implement the measures that may be required,” and 10