7 international responsibility made by the State in an Ecuadorean newspaper. Nevertheless, they indicated that this point would not be complied with until the text had been translated and published in a French newspaper with widespread circulation. Subsequently, in a communication of March 17, 2008, the representatives indicated that Mr. Tibi “ha[d] advised […] that, in order to achieve compliance with the judgment issued by the Court, […] he would be willing to accept that the publication ordered by the Court […] be limited to the communication with the public apology issued by the State and the operative paragraphs of the judgment.” According to information presented by the representatives in the communication of June 9, 2008, Daniel Tibi had approved the text of the apology presented by the State. Nevertheless, they indicted that the operative paragraphs of the judgment should be attached to this text. In a communication of November 17, 2008, the representatives advised that the State had not provided information concerning total compliance with the eleventh and twelfth operative paragraphs of the Court’s judgment. 13. That, in its communication of May 1, 2007, the Commission assessed positively the publication of the apology that the State had made in a local newspaper. Despite this, the Commission indicated that it was awaiting its translation and publication in a newspaper in France. In a communication of June 30 2008, the Commission underscored the agreement reached by the parties with regard to publication of the text of the “public apology,” and urged the State to publish it as soon as possible. On December 29, 2008, the Commission expressed its concern because the State had not implemented the measures of reparation, since the Court had stipulated in its judgment of September 7, 2004, that these reparations should be implemented within six months. In this regard, the Commission considered “that the publication [must] be made as soon as possible, in order to achieve the objectives declared by the Court of ensuring that society as a whole would know the truth of the case, that the reputation of the victim would be restored, and that similar facts would be prevented in future.” 14. That, based on the information presented by the parties, the Court observes that, on February 26, 2006, the State published a declaration acknowledging its international responsibility and making a public apology for the violation of the human rights of Daniel Tibi and his next of kin in the local newspaper “El Comercio.” Consequently, the Court finds that the twelfth operative paragraph of the judgment (supra Having Seen paragraph 1) has been complied with partially. In addition, it underscores the collaboration between the parties to comply with the obligations established in the judgment. In particular, the Court observes that Daniel Tibi has informed the State that he agrees that the translation and publication of the paragraphs ordered by the Court in a French newspaper be limited to the public apology, the acknowledgement of international responsibility and the operative paragraphs of the judgment. Nevertheless, the State has not submitted precise information on the measures it has taken in this regard. In view of the foregoing, the Court finds that the State must forward updated and detailed information on the measures taken to comply with the publication in a French newspaper of the points ordered in the eleventh and twelfth operative paragraphs of the judgment. * * * 15. That, regarding the thirteenth operative paragraph of the judgment ordering the State to “establish a training and education program for the staff of the judiciary, the public prosecutor’s office, the police and prison staff, including medical, psychiatric and psychological personnel, on principles and standards for the protection of human rights in the treatment of prisoners [...]” (supra Having Seen paragraph 1), on April 9, 2007, the State advised that the Attorney General’s Office would be responsible for implementing this