3 the stay of these people in the offices and of the travel scheduled for the following day; c) the existence of a Judgment delivered by the Court, the arrival of the Spanish Comisión Rogatoria in Guatemala concerning the Genocide cases and subsequent determination of responsibilities of the instigators of these events, and the request for an initial hearing of General Efrain Ríos-Montt in the cases proceeding before the national courts “all demonstrate that these events of intimidation and harassment are aimed at silencing the voices of those who now dare talk and thus stopping the recovery processes under way"; d) on October 3, 2006, the CALDH reported the threats to the Rabinal Ministerio Público [Public Prosecutor's Office] and to the Movimiento Nacional de Derechos Humanos [National Human Rights Movement]; it sent a communiqué to all social organizations; it submitted the note to the Comisión Presidencial Coordinadora de la Política del Ejecutivo en Materia de Derechos Humanos [Presidential Steering Committee for Executive Policy on Human Rights] (COPREDEH) requesting urgent action towards protecting the members of the ECAP; on October 4, 2006, it filed a complaint before the Rabinal Procuraduría de Derechos Humanos [Office of the Prosecutor for Human Rights]; on October 5, 2006, it reported the facts to the Spanish Embassy; and on October 6, 2006, it reported the events to the High Commissioner for Human Rights in Guatemala; e) the facts presented demonstrate that there is imminent and serious risk of irreparable harm to the beneficiaries, since the note warns against the possibility of "a kidnap and something else", which reveals an interest to stop the processes and the progress made so far, particularly the achievements of the communities affected by the Plan de Sánchez Massacre, and evidences the intention that the petitioners become aware that they are being constantly watched, not only on account of the incident of September 30, 2006, but also because of the evident knowledge of the actions scheduled for October 2, 2006 by the members of the ECAP, and f) it is the State’s responsibility to adopt security measures to protect all individuals under its jurisdiction; this duty becomes even more evident in relation to those involved in cases proceeding before the organs of the InterAmerican System for the Protection of Human Rights, such as the Case of Plan de Sánchez Massacre, which is still in the compliance stage. 5. Based on Article 63(2) of the American Convention, CALDH requested the Court to order the State to: a) install a permanent post of officers from the Individual Protection Division 24 hours a day at the ECAP’s offices in Rabinal, Baja Verapaz; b) design a patrolling plan covering a number of roads across the Municipality of Rabinal, where the threatened persons travel and live, in order to identify the Isuzu vehicle and prevent any of the ECAP members from suffering “a kidnap and something else”. Such plan should be consulted with the ECAP and implemented immediately; the activities and their outcomes must be informed at least every fortnight to the ECAP, the CALDH and the Court, so as to verify the efficiency of the patrolling tasks; c) provide 24-hour, direct contact telephone lines manned by decisionmaking staff from the National Civilian Police and the Prosecutor’s Office of the Municipalities of Rabinal, San Martín Jilotepeque, Nebaj, Santa Cruz del Quiché, Comalapa and the Capital City —all areas frequented by ECAP members—,