2 8. […] that the State must submit a report to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights on the measures taken to comply with this Judgment every six months from the date of notification of th[e] Judgment. […] 9. […] to monitor compliance with th[e] Judgment and that the case will be concluded once the State has fully carried out the provisions set forth in th[e] Judgment. 2. The reports of the State of Nicaragua (hereinafter “the State” or “Nicaragua”) dated March 22 and September 26, 2002; March 28 and November 18, 2003; June 4 and December 17, 2004; February 23, March 7 and August 5, 2005, and May 19, 2006. 3. The observations of the representatives of the victims (hereinafter “the representatives”) dated June 28 and October 15, 2002; April 25, November 4 and 14, 2003; May 6, July 12 and November 17, 2004; January 18 and September 6, 2005; June 19, 2006; July 13, 2007 and April 22, 2008. Also, the communications of May 6, 2005 and December 13, 2006, concerning the “request for additional reparations” and the “supplementary request for additional reparations,” respectively. 4. The observations of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Inter-American Commission” or “the Commission”) dated April 16, July 18 and November 7, 2002; May 20 and November 17, 2003; March 3, July 12 and November 16, 2004; February 2 and April 20, 2005, and July 5, 2006. 5. The order of the President of the Court of March 14, 2008, in which she decided, inter alia, to convene the Inter-American Commission, the representatives and the State to a private hearing to be held at the seat of the Court on May 3, 2008, for the Court to obtain information from the State on compliance with the third, fourth, sixth and seventh operative paragraphs of the judgment on merits, reparations and costs delivered on August 31, 2001 (hereinafter “the Judgment”) in the instant case and hear the observations of the Inter-American Commission and the representatives. 6. The private hearing held by the Court on May 3, 2008, during which the State, the representatives and the Commission referred to the status of compliance with the Judgment.2 7. The documents submitted by the State3 and the representatives4 during the private hearing. 8. The request made by the panel of judges during this hearing inviting the representatives and the State to reach agreement on the measures and actions needed to achieve full compliance with the Judgment delivered in this case. 2 In accordance with Article 6(2) of the Rules of Procedure, the Court held the hearing with a panel of judges composed of: Diego García-Sayán, Sergio García Ramírez and Leonardo A. Franco. There appeared before the hearing: (a) for the State: Hazel Law Blanco, Coordinator of the SDC/PRODEP Indigenous Component; Joel Dixon, Secretary for the Indigenous Peoples of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and Ramón Canales, Representative of the Secretariat for the Caribbean Coast; (b) for the representatives: Maia Campbell and Mario Rizo, legal advisers to the Community, and Levito Jonathan, Santa López, Wilfredo McLean and Dinarte Salomón Felipe, members of the Community; and (c) for the Inter-American Commission: Isabel Madariaga, adviser. 3 This was the “Report of the State of Nicaragua on compliance with the Judgment delivered by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in the case of the Mayagna de Awas Tingni Indigenous Community.” 4 These were: “Documents presented by the Awas Tingni Community at the private hearing on May 3, 2008.”