ii) “urgenc y”, and iii) the need to “avoid irreparable damage to persons.” These three conditions must coexist and be present in any situation in w hich the Court’s intervention is requested. Likew ise, the three conditions described must persist in order for the Court to maintain the protection ordered. If one of them is no longer valid, the Court must assess the appropriateness of continuing with the protection ordered. 3 4. By virtue of its jurisdiction, within the framework of provisional measures the Court must only consider those arguments that refer strictly and directly to the extreme gravity, urgency, and need to avoid irreparable damage to persons. Thus, with the purpose of deciding if it shall continue to certify the validity of the provisional measures, the Tribunal must analyze if the situation of extreme gravity and urgency that led to their adoption still exists, or in any case, if new circumstances that are equally grave and urgent call for their maintenance. Any other matter may only be brought before the Court through the corresponding contentious case.4 a) Agreeme nt on the Improvement of the Pe nite ntia ry System and the Lifting of Provisional Measures 5. Brazil reported to the Court that certain federal authorities and authorities from the state of Rondônia as well as the representatives of the beneficiaries signed the “Agreement for the Improvement of the Penitentiary System of the Stat e of Rondônia and the Lifting of Provisional Measures Granted by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights” 5 on August 24, 2011. This Agreement identified the main problems that exist at the Urso Branco Prison and proposed five courses of action for the authorities: a) Infrastructure: expansion of the capacity and improvement of the physical structure of the penitentiary centers; 3 Cf. Case of Carpio Nicolle. Provisional Measures regarding Guatemala. Order of the InterAmerican Court of Human Rights of July 6, 2009, fourteenth considering paragraph ; Matter of the Forensic Anthropology Foundation of Guatemala. Provisional Measures regarding Guatemala. Order of the Inter American Court of Human Rights of February 22, 2011, second considering paragraph, and Matter of Certain Penitentiary Centers of Venezuela, Provisional Measures regarding Venezuela. Order of the Inter American Court of Human Rights of July 6, 2011, fourth considering paragraph. 4 Cf. Matter of James et al. Provisional Measures regarding Trinidad and Tobago. Order of the InterAmerican Court of Human Rights of August 20, 1998, sixth considering paragraph; Matter of the Indigenous People of Kankuamo. Provisional Measures regarding Colombia. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of June 7, 2011, sixth considering paragraph, and Case of Rosendo Cantú et al. Provisional Measures regarding Mexico. Order of the Inter -American Court of Human Rights of July 1, 2011, tenth considering paragraph. 5 The bodies that signed the Agreement are: Ministry of Justice, National Penitentiary Department, Secretariat of Human Rights of the Presidency of the Republic, Council for the Defense of the Rights of Human Beings, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Governor of the State of Rondônia, State Secretariat for Justice of Rondônia, Secretariat of Public Safety and Defense of the C itizens, Civil Police Force, Department of State Works, Attorney General of the State, Public Prosecutors’ Of fice of Rondônia, Public Defenders’ Office of Rondônia, and Judicial Power of the State of Rondônia. 3