entities in charge of the investigations had conducted the following proceedings in order to determine his whereabouts and punish the possible responsible for his disappearance: a) have made contact with the next-of-kin of Mr. Almonte Herrera; b) have searched for him in the entire national territory; c) have monitored the individuals’ entrance to and exit from the country; d) have ordered the performance of autopsies to verify whether the possible remains of Mr. Almonte were undeclared at the morgue or some medical center; and e) have made inquiries within the National Police. In addition, the State forwarded a certificate indicating that the General Directorate of Prisons "does not [keep] any record showing that he is confined in one of the prisons centers under [its] control". 8. As to Mr. Yuverky Almonte Herrera and Joel Almonte, relatives of Mr. Juan Almonte Herrera, as well as Mr. Genaro Rincón and Francisco de León Herrera, lawyers, the State informed that “the beneficiaries were provided with the security so requested" by the Office of the Chief of the National Police. Likewise, it indicated that “since the measures have been adopted, there has occurred no event putting the integrity of the beneficiaries at risk”. As to Ms. Ana Josefa Montilla, relative of Mr. Almonte, she is not currently in the Dominican Republic. 9. The representatives sustained that the Dominican State has not complied with the implementation of the provisional measures given that it has not established the whereabouts of Mr. Almonte Herrera. Moreover, they pointed out that neither the lawyers nor relatives of Mr. Almonte Herrera had been contacted by the State for the implementation of the provisional measures, except for two interviews conducted before the Attorney General’s Office. Furthermore, they expressed their disagreement with the security measures being implemented by the National Police, since it should be performed by a multidisciplinary team. Finally, they pointed out that the efforts of the Public Prosecutors’ Office to shed light on the case and bring charges against the alleged perpetrators and participants had not been enough. Regarding the situation of risk, they pointed out that as of July 2011, the situation had not changed, “given that their telephones were still tapped, [they] feel threatened and they also live with great uncertainty [because they] continue requesting justice be done and to establish the whereabouts of Juan Almonte and keep requesting the State to identify those responsible […] and bring [them] before a court of law”. As to Ms. Ana Josefa Montilla, they indicated that “despite she lives outside the Dominican [R]epublic, [...] whenever she enters the country, her telephones are tapped and she keeps being under strict surveillance", which places her "in a situation of constant fear and tension". 10. The Inter-American Commission pointed out that “the State’s response does not satisfy the gravity and urgency of the situation” given that it did not submit specific information regarding the actions being taken to find Juan Almonte Herrera, or the investigations conducted to shed light on the circumstances in which he would have disappeared and to identify and punish those responsible for his disappearance, considering “there are conclusive evidence of the alleged participation of state agents in the facts”. In this respect, it indicated that the passage of time without the adoption of serious measures of investigation and search increases the extreme risk in which the beneficiary may be and could result in irreparable damage for him. Moreover, it noted there are contradictions between the allegations submitted by the State and the representatives regarding the existence of measures to provide security and protection to the other beneficiaries, given that the State did not forward documentary evidence in relation to the protective measures that it claimed it had been implementing. In this respect, the Commission sustained that, according to the characteristics of this matter, 3