-11thereof, within a reasonable period of time, the Court notes that, as far as the developments in connection with bill No. 15.856, for the enactment of the “Relaxation of Criminal Cassation Requirements Law” are concerned, on October 4, 2005 such bill was approved upon the favorable unanimous opinion of the Permanent Commission on Legal Affairs of the Legislative Assembly (supra Having Seen clause No. 7(b)). Moreover, the Inter-American Commission stated that said bill “does, to a certain extent, relax [said remedy]” to bring it in line with Article 8(2)(h) of the American Convention, and that it is a part of a “process for compliance ‘within a reasonable time period’ that is to be monitored by the Court” (supra Having Seen clause No. 9). The victim’s representatives’ view is that the State has not complied with this obligation; they noted that the bill has not been voted on by the Legislative Assembly en bloc, and expressed their concern in connection with the provisions of the second temporary article of the bill (supra Having Seen clause No. 8). 18. That, in order to assess whether the adjustment of the domestic laws is taking place within a reasonable period of time, the Court has deemed it necessary for Costa Rica to provide updated information on any domestic measures adopted therefor, including developments in connection with the enactment of the bill into a law and the administrative and any other measures it may have adopted in that regard. On this subject, the Court considers it worth noting that about two years have elapsed since the State was notified of the Judgment, and pointing out that such adjustment to conform to the Convention is particularly important at the Costa Rican legal level. * * * 19. That the Court has verified Costa Rica’s partial compliance with its obligation to nullify the judgment rendered on November 12, 1999 by the Criminal Court of the First Judicial Circuit of San José (fourth operative paragraph of the Judgment of July 2, 2004). The State has complied with its obligation to nullify those effects of the domestic judgment of November 12, 1999 that were referred to in paragraph 195(1), (2), (4), (5), (6) and (8) of the Court’s Judgment; this means that it has nullified the following effects: 1) Mauricio Herrera-Ulloa was declared guilty on four counts of the crime of publishing offenses constituting defamation; 2) the penalty imposed on Mauricio Herrera-Ulloa of 120 days’ fine, for a total of ¢300,000.00 (three hundred thousand colones); 4) Mauricio Herrera-Ulloa was ordered to publish the “Now, Therefore” portion of the judgment in the newspaper “La Nación,” in the section called “El País,” in the same print face used for the articles about which the criminal complaint was filed; 5) “La Nación” was ordered to take down the link at the La Nación Digital website on the Internet, between the surname Przedborski and the articles about which the criminal complaint was filed; 6) “La Nación” was ordered to create a link at the La Nación Digital website on the Internet between the articles about which the complaint was filed and the operative part of the judgment; and 8) Mauricio Herrera-Ulloa’s name was entered into the Judiciary’s Record of Convicted Felons. 20. That it is the Court’s view that it is essential for the State to provide it with up-to-date information on the following aspects, compliance with which is still pending: