28. Based on the above, the Court concludes that Barbados has partially complied with the measure ordered in the eleventh operative paragraph of the Judgment with regards to setting aside and not carrying out the death sentence imposed on Mr. DaCosta Cadogan, while it remains pending to provide him, within a reasonable time and “without the need for a new trial, a hearing for the judicial determination of the appropriate sentence in his case, in consideration of the particular characteristics of the crime and [his] participation and degree of culpability”, all in light of the new legislative adopted. Furthermore, the Tribunal considers that the State has fully complied with the measure ordered in the twelfth operative paragraph of the Judgment, relating to the obligation not to impose the sentence of death on Mr. DaCosta Cadogan under the new legislative measures. 29. Finally, the State is reminded that providing the victim with a hearing is the only measure pending compliance in order to consider archiving the case. Also, although the Judgment required that this measure be complied with within a reasonable time, to date more than ten years have passed without it being fulfilled because the legislative amendments required in order to comply with it were only enacted two years ago. Consequently, the State is required, within the term granted in operative paragraph 6, to inform any decision on the sentence imposed to Mr. DaCosta Cadogan and, in case the hearing ordered by this Court has not yet taken place, to proceed without delay to set the date for the judicial determination of the appropriate sentence in the case of Mr. DaCosta. D. Reimbursement of the Victims’ Legal Assistance Fund 30. In the Order of November 2017, the Court required the State to carry out, within six months of its notification,45 the reimbursement to the Legal Assistance Fund of the sum of US$ 1,999.60 (one thousand nine hundred and ninety-nine United States dollars and sixty cents) for the expenses incurred for the cancellation of air tickets for the appearance of the representatives at the hearing on monitoring compliance originally scheduled for July 1, 2015, since it was delayed at the request of the State, which made this request with only seven days’ notice before the scheduled date. 31. To date, Barbados has not provided any information in this regard, even though more than a year and a half has elapsed since the six-month term established in the Order expired to make the said reimbursement.46 Consequently, the State is reminded, with regards to the financing of the Court’s Assistance Fund, that the available resources are limited. Since it came into operation in 2010, it has depended on voluntary contributions from cooperation sources and one OAS Member State,47 as well as on the reimbursements made by States found responsible. Accordingly, the failure of States to promptly comply with the reimbursement to the Assistance Fund of the amounts ordered in the corresponding decisions, directly affects its sustainability and, above all, the access to justice of the alleged victims, and if applicable, victims before this Tribunal.48 45 The Order was notified to the parties and the Commission on December 22, 2017. 46 Said term expired on June 25, 2018. 47 The Victims’ Legal Assistance Fund does not receive resources from the OAS regular budget. To date the funds have come from cooperation agreements signed by the Tribunal with Norway and Denmark, and from the voluntary contribution made by Colombia. In this regard, see: 2018 Annual Report of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Chapter X, section A, available [in Spanish] at: http://www.corteidh.or.cr/tablas/informe2018/ingles.pdf. 48 Cf. Case of Duque v. Colombia. Monitoring compliance with judgment. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of November 22, 2018, considerandum 24. -12-