14 request for provisional measures presented by the Inter-American Commission on May 16, 2007, the representatives referred to three new facts that would justify the expansion of the provisional measures, namely: 1) the investigation into the directors of Observatorio Venezolano de Prisiones conducted by the secretary of the Minister Ramón Rodríguez Chacín "trying to prosecute them for treason and for having instigated civil rebellion". Specifically, “in this year, a criminal investigation was initiated […] against [Mr. Humberto Prado] for his alleged responsibility for the crimes before mentioned, based on alleged evidence that link him to those facts"; 2) "[recent] information in [the] press (La Razón newspaper, of September 6, 2009) in which it was asserted that a preliminary inquiry has been conducted [...] against [Mr. Humberto Prado] for his alleged responsibility for the conflicting situation inside the Venezuelan prisons” and 3) the accusation on the part of the State’s agent at the public hearing, when he [referred to] “the coincidence that, according to him, seems to exist between the strikes conducted at the Venezuelan prisons each time the [Observatorio Venezolano de Prisiones] lodges the corresponding complaints before the bodies of the [Inter-American] system”. 25. That, with regard to Mr. Carlos Nieto, the representatives referred to a specific event that occurred on August 19, 2009, at approximately 11.00 A.M. According to the representatives, on said occasion, Mr. Carlos Nieto: was visited at his residence by three alleged officers connected to the Metropolitan Police, who were in uniform and were holding their helmets. Mr. Nieto opened the door and asked them in, assuming that it has to do with some process related to the protective measures ordered in his favor - like the signing of the records that several officers regularly send to his home[.] However, once the alleged officers were inside his residence, they informed him that he must go with them, due to orders issued to that end. Despite he requested an explanation of the reason or whether there was a judicial order to go with them, the alleged officers disregarded such request. Even when [Mr. Nieto] insisted that he should communicate with his lawyers to learn about the rights that protected him in such irregular act, the alleged officers asked him whether, due to his profession as lawyer, he could not defend himself, to which he responded that in that particular case, he was the victim and therefore, he preferred being represented by other lawyers. Mr. Nieto, in light of this situation and since he was alone in his residence, asked the officers for a few minutes to go to his bedroom, with the excuse to go to the bathroom; it was then that he had access to the computer and sent a message to the social network called “[T]witter”, informing on the presence of such alleged officers in his residence. When he returned to the living-room, the alleged officers inquired him about the public brief that was published with the petitions of the people detained in 'Tocoron' Confinement Center. Next, they said to him ‘Why don’t you shut up and stay out of problems?' You should stop saying such things of the Minister’, in relation to the complaints made for the irregularities in the penitentiary centers of the country, to which Mr. Nieto answered ‘I have anything against nobody and that th[at] [was] my job as human rights defender, for which I did not have to shut up[']. The visit of the alleged police officers lasted approximately 30 minutes and it was interrupted by the so many phone calls that Mr. Nieto received after sending information via the network 'twitter'. When the alleged officers noted the telephone calls, they retired and the visit concluded, once they told him to 'be careful'. 26. That, apart from the new facts presented by the representatives regarding Mr. Humberto Prado and Carlos Nieto, within the framework of the public hearing held at the seat of the Inter-American Court on September 30, 2009, the State referred to "two situations" that, in the first year, had proved the coincidence between the presentations of Venezuela before the bodies of the Inter-American system and the beginning of the strikes at the penitentiary centers of the country. The State pointed out that: i) in March, 2009, when Venezuela presented the situation of prisons before the Inter-American Commission, “strikes were conducted in thirteen prisons, famine strikes" and ii) the day of the public hearing before the Court, "and [for] the last two days, a famine strike was organized in Uribana [prison]", concluding that the representatives “did not even try to [hide such coincidences]". According to the representatives, the statement made by the State constitutes evidence of the "stigmatization" or "criminalization" against human rights defenders, which, finally, supports the request for "expansion of the provisional measures