15 during the referred-to public hearing, the Commission did not answer to the Tribunal’s request. 42. Notwithstanding this, the Court observes that the dossier of the present provisional measures records that the representative of the beneficiaries has mentioned that Mr. Eduar Lanchero has been with the Peace Community “since the first months in which this population suffered massive displacement,” and that over the passage of time, the population “was asking him […] to prolong his accompaniment, until he came to be considered one of the Community.”14 With regard to this situation, the State has not objected to Mr. Eduar Lanchero’s situation as a beneficiary of the present provisional measures. 43. Given the confluence of factors that reveal grave aggressions against members of the Peace Community, and in view of the information presented by the representative, it is reasonable to infer that Mr. Eduar Lanchero, Mr. Jesús Emilio Tuberquia, and Mr. Reinaldo Areiza are in a situation of extreme gravity and urgency which merits the adoption of specific measures for their protection. In this regard, the Tribunal takes into account that the representative has expressed his opposition to the measures on behalf of Mr. Lanchero being adopted within the Program of Protection and Assistance for Victims and Witnesses of the Attorney General of the Nation. However, the representative has not presented other options by which Mr. Lanchero could rely on the protection he requires. 44. Taking into account the aforementioned, the Tribunal finds that the State must adopt special measures necessary to protect the life and integrity of Mr. Eduar Lanchero, Mr. Jesús Emilio Tuberquia, and Mr. Reinaldo Areiza, and that said measures should be agreed upon with the representative. This should facilitate dialogue with the State as well as an analysis of the measures that are most agreed upon. However, independent of the need to achieve measures in agreement with the representative, the Tribunal recalls that the State is especially obliged to guarantee the rights of such persons, and that they should propel the necessary investigations to clarify the facts, in terms of that laid out by Article 1(1) of the American Convention (supra Considering 30). * * * 45. The Court hereby notes that the present provisional measures were granted on November 24, 200015 (supra Having Seen 1), and that they have been in effect for almost ten years. To a question expressed by the Tribunal during the public hearing held on the present matter (supra Having Seen 5), The Inter-American Commission responded that the respective petition is in the admissibility phase, that is, it still has not been accepted. 46. The Court has established that the provisional measures have an exceptional nature, that they are announced according to the needs of protection and, once announced, they 14 15 Cf. Representantative’s brief dated November 9, 2009, (provisional measures file, volume XII, leaf 3059). October 9, 2000, the President of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights adopted urgent measures in favor of the members of the Peace Community. Cf. Matter of Peace Community of San José de Apartadó. Provisional Measures regarding Colombia. Order of the President of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of October 9, 2000, operative paragraph first. These measures have been ratified subsequently by the Court through the Order of November 24, 2000, (supra Having Seen 1).