8 occasions.5 Therefore, this Court deems it necessary to protect said persons through provisional measures, pursuant to the provisions of the American Convention. 12. That the State has the specific duty to protect all people working in nongovernmental organizations and other groups or individuals working for the defense of human rights, since their work constitutes a positive contribution supplementing the efforts made by the State in its capacity as guarantor of the rights of individuals under its jurisdiction.6 13. That the State must use all available jeans to prevent the ECAP members from suffering irreparable damage. In this regard, this Court considers that the right to life and the right to physical integrity “imply not only that the State must respect them (negative obligation), but also that the State must adopt all appropriate measures to guarantee them (positive obligation) in accordance with its general obligation established in Article 1(1) of the American Convention.”7 14. That the State must take all such steps as are appropriate so that the protection measures set forth in the [...] Resolution be planned and implemented with the participation of the beneficiaries thereof or their representatives so that such measures are carried out effectively and efficiently. * * * 15. That the President, in operative paragraph five of Resolution of October 20, 2006, required the State to inform the Inter-American Court of the protection measures adopted pursuant to said Resolution, and that Guatemala has so far failed to furnish such information. 16. That the State has the duty to inform the Court, through the presentation of the required reports (supra Having Seen clause No. 6 and infra Operative Paragraph No. 4). Such duty is fulfilled through the timely submission of a document including the material, specific, true, current and detailed information the State has the duty to provide,8 and the manner it is complying with the order issued by it. 5 Cf. Matter of the persons imprisoned in the “Dr.Sebastião Martins Silveira” Penitentiary in Araquara, São Paulo. Provisional Measures, supra note 2, Considering clause No. 20; Matter of Gloria Giralt de GarcíaPrieto et al. Provisional Measures, supra note 2, Considering clause No. 10; and Matter of Millacura Llaipén et al. Provisional Measures. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of July 06, 2006, Considering clause No. 9. 6 Cf. Matter of the persons imprisoned in the “Dr.Sebastião Martins Silveira” Penitentiary in Araquara, São Paulo. Provisional Measures, supra note 2, Considering clause No. 24; Matter of Gloria Giralt de GarcíaPrieto et al. Provisional Measures, supra note 2, Considering clause No. 8; and Matter of Mery Naranjo et al. Provisional Measures. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of September 22, 2006, Considering clause No. 8. 7 Cf. Matter of the Forensic Anthropology Foundation. Provisional Measures. Order of the InterAmerican Court of Human Rights of July 4, 2006, Considering clause No. 13; Matter of Yare I and Yare II Capital Region Penitenciary Center. Provisional Measures. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of March 30, 2006, Considering clause No. 16; and Matter of Monagas Judicial Confinement Center ("La Pica"). Provisional Measures. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of September 02, 2006, Considering clause No. 18. 8 Cf. Matter of Carlos Nieto et al. Provisional Measures, supra note 3, Considering clause No. 16; Matter of Millacura Llaipén et al., Provisional Measures, supra note 5, Considering clause No. 20; and Matter of Marta Colomina and Liliana Veásquez. Provisional Measures, supra note 3, Considering clause No. 9.