3 6. The notes of the Secretariat of the Court (hereinafter “the Secretariat”) of January 19, April 13, and August 2, 2009; through which, following the instructions of the Presidency of the Court, requested the State the presentation of a new report in which it pointed out all the measures adopted to fulfill the reparations pending compliance. 7. The Order of the Presidency of the Court of December 21, 2009, through which it decided to call the Inter-American Commission, the State, and the representative to a private hearing for the Court to obtain information from the part of the State regarding the compliance of the Judgment issued in the present case, and to listen the observations of the Inter-American Commission and the representative in that sense, and to receive information regarding the request for the adoption of provisional measures in favor of the victim (infra Having Seen 12 to 15). 8. The private hearing held during the LXXXVI Ordinary Period of Sessions of the Inter-American Court, in the headquarters of the Tribunal, in San José, Costa Rica, on February 1, 2010.1 9. The note of the Secretariat of February 19, 2010, through which, following instructions of the Court in full, requested the State, within a non-extendable term until March 19, 2010, to present information regarding the following aspects linked to the fulfillment of the referred Judgment: a) if in the second process against Mrs. De La Cruz Flores new evidence and facts were considered –and the dates in which they occurred-, linked to the new attribution of the crime of terrorism-affiliation to a terrorist organization; b) the specific evidence in the file, that does not refer to acts of a medical nature, carried out by Mrs. De La Cruz Flores and, in the same way, that it proves in a specific manner that acts of affiliation with a terrorist organization and a “constant association logic”, in the terms described by the [...] State in the private hearing; c) the relation between the acts attributed to Mrs. De La Cruz Flores and the respective rules and punishments applicable to each of them, taking into account that, according to the Judgments of the Peruvian Tribunals, the time that they cover involves 2 different criminal codes and the Decree Law 25475; d) observations regarding the guarantee against self-incrimination, taking into account the reference to the Judgment of November 23, 2009, of the Supreme Court of the Republic, in the sense that “it results legitimate to raise the sanction imposed, since […] those processed assumed an obstructionist conduct during the investigations, and there is no extenuating circumstance to lower the sentence […] because they have denied the facts attributed to them”, and e) if there is any extraordinary recourse in the Peruvian law that can be invoked regarding the Judgment of November 23, 2009. 10. The briefs of March 29 and 26, 2010, in which the State presented information regarding the questions submitted by the Tribunal in a note of the Secretariat of February 19, 2010 (supra Having Seen 9). 11. The communications of April 6 and May 4, 2010, in which the representatives, and the Inter-American Commission presented, respectively, its observations to the information submitted by the State in his briefs of March 19 and 26, 2010 (supra Having Seen 10). 1 To this hearing attended the following persons: for the Inter-American Commission, Santiago Cantón, Executive Secretary and Silvia Serrano Guzmán, Specialist of the Executive Secretary; for the representative of the victim, Carolina Maida Loayza Tamayo, and for the State, Mr. César San Martín, Supreme Judge President of the Permanent Criminal Chamber of the Judicial Branch, and Mr. Stephen Haas of the Ministry of Justice; Mrs. Delia Muñoz, Main Agent, Jimena Rodríguez of the State Attorney´s office, and Dalia Suárez of the Ministry of Health.