6. On various occasions, the representatives of the beneficiary and the InterAmerican Commission referred to “the investigation of the facts that g[ave] rise to these [provisional] measures”. The representatives requested that the Court “require that the Honduran State provide precise, clear, timely, and relevant information [in that regard], which is fundamental for guaranteeing respect for [the beneficiary's] life and physical integrity.” The Court observes that in its Order of November 29, 2008 (supra Having Seen clause 1), it did not request information from the State regarding the investigation of these facts. Additionally, in the Judgment issued in the case of Kawas Fernández v. Honduras, the Court ordered that the State, as part of its obligation to investigate the facts, “in a diligent manner and within a reasonable period of time, process and fully deal with any complaint of coercion, intimidation, or threats made by the witnesses in domestic proceedings and to take all legally Thus, information relating to prescribed measures for the investigation.”3 investigations into the facts that led to the adoption of provisional measures in favor of Mr. Dencen Andino Alvarado, which arose from the facts analyzed by the Tribunal in the case of Kawas Fernández, must be analyzed in proceedings for the monitoring of the State's compliance with that Judgment. Consequently, the Tribunal shall not refer to that issue in this Order. A. Adopt, without delay, the measures necessary to effectively ensure the protection of Mr. Dencen Andino Alvarado’s life and personal integrity (Operative Paragraph one of the Order of November 29, 2008) 7. In the briefs submitted in 2009, the State reported on a series of meetings held with Mr. Dencen Andino Alvarado and his representatives in order to agree upon the measures of protection that would be implemented in his favor. According to the State, measures such as a police escort, a bulletproof vest for use while selling his goods on public streets, and his inclusion in the witness protection program of the Public Prosecutor's Office were agreed upon. Mr. Andino also received telephone numbers to call in case of emergency. In order to supervise the police protection provided, it was later determined that a record book signed by Mr. Andino and his escorts should be kept for the purpose of controlling compliance with assigned shifts. The State indicated on various occasions that Mr. Andino had not complied with his commitments, given that he was not at his home when surveillance personnel arrived and that the beneficiary “goes to liquor stores and bars where he wants to stay and the police continue escorting him.” Subsequently, the State indicated that the bulletproof vest had not been provided to Mr. Andino because he no longer made a living selling candy and because he had stated that it was uncomfortable to wear. 8. Additionally, the State reported that on January 12, 2009, “a prosecutor's request for an indictment [was issued] against Mr. Dencen Andino Alvarado for the alleged commission of the crime of Theft” to the detriment of another. Apparently, Mr. Andino had sold some “necklaces […] allegedly stolen from the injured party” to a pawnshop. On January 13, 2009, a “hearing [was held] so that the accused could render a statement.” At that hearing, “in accordance with the [p]rovisional [m]easures [o]rdered by the […] Court in favor of Mr. Andino Alvarado, the latter was provided with […] the [p]recautionary [m]easure of periodic appearance before the [Sectional Court of First Instance of Tela, Atlántida, Honduras].” The State submitted a copy of the request for indictment. On April 14, 2010, the State reported 3 Case of Kawas Fernández v. Honduras. Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judment of April 3, 2009. Series C No. 196, para. 193. 3