-47. The brief dated May 25, 2006, whereby the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter, “the Inter-American Commission”) submitted comments to the fifth bi-monthly report filed by the State on March 28, 2006. Basically, the Commission argued as follows: a) as regards Montero and her family, further information is required to “perfect the protection scheme” and bring it in line with the Court’s order. Accordingly, it expressed its concern “over the comments made by the beneficiaries’ representatives on the inexistence of a risk-assessment report for Belinda Montero and her family by the Colombian Police Department.” Accordingly, we are awaiting the comments and remarks of the parties on a potential follow-up meeting, “considering that the Colombian Police Department was required to provide a risk report to Sandra Montero”. The “transportation and relocation support […] covers the short-term security needs of the measures’ beneficiaries.” The State has failed to provide information on the investigation of the facts that led to such measures, and its next report is required to include “a detailed account of the investigation measures implemented and the results thus obtained;” b) as regards the measures for the protection of Messrs. Salomón FlórezContreras and Luis José Pundor-Quintero and Ana Diva Quintero-Quintero de Pundor, as well as their respective families, the Commission “expects a meeting to be held between the State and their representatives regarding the measures to be adopted.” The State’s next report is required to include information on any measures adopted in connection with such beneficiaries; and c) it requested that the Court “maintain the provisional measures in force and follow up on any specific action taken in order to comply with the measures ordered by the Court.” 8. The note from the Secretariat of the Court (hereinafter, “the Secretariat”), dated May 26, 2006, whereby, further to the President’s instructions, the Secretariat reminded the State of Colombia that May 8, 2006 marked the expiration of the deadline set for it to submit the report requested by the President through the Order of April 28, 2006 (supra Having Seen clause No. 6) regarding the extension of scope of the measures for the protection of the rights to life and humane treatment of Messrs. Salomón Flórez-Contreras and Luis José Pundor-Quintero and Ana Diva Quintero-Quintero de Pundor, and their respective families, and the State was thus required to submit such report in the shortest time possible. 9. The Secretariat’s notes of June 19, 2006, whereby, further to the instructions of the President, it requested the State and the beneficiaries’ representatives to provide, no later than June 22, 2006, the information required to be submitted as per the President’s Order of April 28, 2006 (supra Having Seen clause No. 6), since the Court was going to assess the possibility of ratifying such order of the President in its Next Regular Session and supervising the enforcement of the measures adopted for the benefit of Sandra Belinda Montero-Fuentes and her next of kin. By means of said notes, the State was reminded that the deadline for submission of the bi-monthly report on the enforcement of the measures had expired on May 28, 2006 without such report being filed with the Secretariat.