4 Court, in matters not yet submitted to its consideration, at the request of the Commission, may take the provisional measures that it deems pertinent. 2. That, according to Article 25.1 and 25.2 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court: 1. At any stage of the proceedings involving cases of extreme gravity and urgency, and when necessary to avoid irreparable damage to persons, the Court may, at the request of a party or on its own motion, order such provisional measures as it deems pertinent, pursuant to Article 63.2 of the Convention. 2. With respect to matters not yet submitted to it, the Court may act at the request of the Commission. 3. That Article 1.1 of the Convention indicates the obligation of States Parties to respect the rights and freedoms recognized therein and to ensure their free and full exercise to all persons subject to their jurisdiction. 4. That, according to the orders of the court of June 22 and December 1, 1994, and September 19, 1997, the State is obliged to adopt immediately all necessary measures to preserve the life and integrity of those persons in whose favor the Court ordered the provisional measures. 5. That there are contradictions in the information provided by the State, in particular with regard to the situation of Miguel Godínez Domingo (supra 8). 6. That, to date, the State has not informed the Court about the adoption of effective measures to recapture the former patrol members or the investigation of the facts to determine the corresponding responsibilities, in compliance with the orders of the InterAmerican Court, and it has not presented reliable information to demonstrate that the circumstances of extreme gravity and urgency have ceased. 7. That the State’s reports of July 5, September 17 and November 24, 1999, and the briefs presented by the Commission on September 1 and November 12, 1999, and January 19, 2000, suggest that there has been an increase in the risk to the safety of the persons protected since the events that occurred on April 30, 1999, and the Court therefore considers that, in its next communications, the State must include sufficient, reliable information in this respect. 8. That the State should continue taking all pertinent steps so that the measures ordered by the Court are planned and applied with the participation of the petitioners, and that they are offered diligently and effectively. 9. That, as an essential element of its duty to protect, the State has the obligation to investigate and inform this Court about the real and effective measures taken to investigate and punish those responsible for the facts that led to the adoption of the provisional measures, and also the status of the processing of the complaints for the alleged threats suffered by Francisca Sales Martín, Natividad Pérez, María García Domingo, Alberto Godínez, Marcos, Juan and Ramiro Godínez Pérez, Alfonso Morales Jiménez and Arturo Federico Méndez Ortiz. 10. That, in its latest periodic reports, the State has not mentioned the protection measures that, in compliance with the Court’s orders, it should provide to Patricia Ispanel