E. Obligation to produce a profile of the life of Rosendo Radilla Pacheco (fifteenth operative paragraph of the Judgment) 40. The State advised that, based on the discrepancies with the victims and their representatives concerning the publication of the profile of the life of Rosendo Radilla Pacheco, it had undertaken to make the publication again, but of an electronic version provided by the representatives. It indicated that the preliminary version of the text had been sent to the representatives on July 23, 2012, and, following its revision, it was returned on August 2, 2012, with some observations. According to the State, on September 7, 2012, the work of preparing the profile for publishing commenced and on October 8, 2012, the State, the victims and their representatives agreed on the content of the text and on the front page of a final version of the document. The State also indicated that, on December 21, 2012, the Secretariat of the Interior gave the victims’ representative 1,945 copies of the book entitled “Señores, soy campesino. Semblanza de Rosendo Radilla Pacheco, desaparecido.” Lastly, it advised that on March 1, 2013, senior authorities of the Federal Government, together with Ana María Radilla Martínez and Rosendo Radilla Martínez, representing Rosendo Radilla Pacheco’s 11 children, made a public presentation of the book. 41. The representatives indicated their agreement with the publication of the profile published by the Mexican State. 42. The Commission appreciated “the efforts made by the State and the representatives to complete the edition and publication” of the profile of the life of Mr. Radilla Pacheco, and considered that the State had complied with this aspect of the Judgment. 43. The Court assesses the measures taken by the State to publish a new profile of the life of Mr. Radilla Pacheco, as well as the organization of an act to present it, with the participation of senior Government officials. Based on the information provided by the parties, the Court finds that the State has complied fully with this measure of reparation. F. Obligation to provide free psychological and/or psychiatric treatment immediately, adequately and effectively, through its specialized public health institutions, to those declared victims in the Judgment who request this (sixteenth operative paragraph of the Judgment) 44. The State indicated that, as established in the working meeting held with the victims and their representatives on May 23, 2012, the Guerrero Victims’ Center of Attention of the Procuraduría Social de Atención a las Víctimas de Delitos (hereinafter PROVÍCTIMA) would provide the psychological care ordered in the Judgment. It also reported that, during this meeting, “[t]his offer was formally accepted” by Tita Radilla Martínez, declared victim and injured party in the Judgment, and by another seven family members who are not considered injured parties in the Judgment. The State also indicated that the “Radilla sisters [also] requested psychological care” for María del Carmen, Victoria and Rosa, all with the surnames Radilla Martínez, since they did not attend the said meeting, as well as “support for the children of the deceased […] Andrea Radilla Martínez,” declared victim and injured party in the Judgment. Thus, according to the State, on August 22, 2012, the representatives forwarded the data and requirements of each of the “114 persons who w[ould] be beneficiaries of the care” that, in good faith, it had undertaken to provide. In this way, according to the State, since June 2012, every month and continuously, PROVÍCTIMA 15