3 c) d) measures attempted at the domestic level2 have not been effective to guarantee the lives of the inmates and deter further violent events in the Uribana Prison. There is no showing that strong and effective action aimed at reducing overcrowding, improving cleanliness or establishing basic security conditions for those deprived of liberty and the visitors will be taken; The urgency requirement set forth in Article 63(2) of the American Convention for the Court to order provisional measures is met by the death of 80 inmates and the serious injuries suffered by at least 213 prisoners. These events represent a serious and imminent risk in view of the poor security conditions in the prison facility and the high rate of violence between inmates and from the guards towards the prisoners, which calls for the urgent intervention of the Court so that further irreparable harm is prevented; The irreparable harm is reflected in the death and injuries of several of the inmates of the Uribana Prison. This demonstrates the State’s failure to fulfill its duty to prevent attacks against the life and physical integrity of prisoners and its failure to adopt security measures essential for preventing further incidents. The failure to adopt investigation and punishment measures and the absence of basic control measures increase the likelihood that such violent situations as those in this case will happen again; e) The inadequate surveillance system intensifies the discontent and violence among inmates, and creates extremely unsafe conditions for anyone visiting the facilities. In addition, the repeated recourse to hunger strikes reveals the lack of channels of communication between the inmates, the authorities, and civil society organizations. All the foregoing evidences the seriousness of the situation; f) It is sufficient for the beneficiaries to be “identifiable” to be granted the above-stated protection measures. In this case, the beneficiaries of the requested protection are the persons detained in the Uribana Prison, those who might be imprisoned there in the future, and visitors; and g) The final solution to the problem of the Venezuelan detention centers and particularly the Uribana Prison also requires integral mid- and longterm measures. However, the urgency and imminence in the present situation require that the State take action that causes immediate impact on the hazardous situation in which the detainees being granted the protection measures are. 2 The Commission has pointed out the following measures and actions allegedly adopted by the State, among others: In November 2004, the National Assembly requested the Executive to declare a state of “prison emergency”; on November 23, 2004, the President of Venezuela established a Presidential Commission to address the Prison Emergency, through Executive Order No.3265; throughout 2006, the State held a series of hearings before the Commission in which it submitted information about a “Humanization Plan involving all penitentiary centers in the country”, the strengthening of the “Custody Immediate Response Team, the removal of directors and sub-directors of […] penitentiary centers for committing acts of corruption, the incorporation of officers into the Human Rights Department in some penitentiary centers, the incorporation of 92 aid custody officers and security forces staff with specialized training, and the creation of the toll-free telephone line 0800 DHumanos”; the Presidential Commission carried out a survey to gather information about the legal position of inmates and promote the reduction of overcrowding in prisons and procedural delays.