2
14.
[…] pay the compensation amount for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage, and
reimburse costs and expenses within the term of one year as from the date of service of the […]
Judgment.
[…]

2.
The communications of July 23, 2007, June 4 and September 19, 2008, whereby the
State referred to compliance with the Judgment.
3.
The briefs of August 20, 2007, July 4, 2008 and January 16, 2009, whereby the
victims’ representatives presented their observations regarding the compliance status of the
Judgment.
4.
The communications of September 4, 2007, July 28 and November 6, 2008, whereby
the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Commission” or the
“Inter-American Commission”) presented its observations on the compliance status of the
Judgment.
5.
The communications of February 5 and December 17, 2008, whereby the victims’
representatives requested the Inter-American Court “to hold a public hearing regarding
compliance with the [Judgment,] in order to determine the scope of non-compliance by the
State.” Such request was made as a part of the representatives’ observations of August 20,
2007, July 4, 2008 and January 16, 2009.
6.
The Order of the Court’s President of August 4, 2009, whereby the State, the
representatives and the Inter-American Commission were summoned to a private hearing to
be held in San José, Costa Rica, at the headquarters of the Inter-American Court, on
September 30, 2009, in order to obtain information from the State about compliance with
the Judgment issued in this case and to listen to the observations of the Inter-American
Commission and the representatives in that regard.
7.
The private hearing held by the Court at its headquarters in San José, Costa Rica, on
September 30, 2009.1 During that private hearing, the Court obtained information from the
State and the observations by the Inter-American Commission and by the representatives
on the reparations pending compliance in this case.
8.
The brief of October 7, 2009, whereby the State presented “the [compliance]
schedule submitted during the hearing [held] on September 30, 2009”, in relation to this
case.
9.
The communications of October 21, 2009, whereby the representatives and the
Inter-American Commission respectively submitted their observations to the compliance
schedule presented by the State (supra Having Seen clause 8).

1

According to Article 6(2) of the Rules of Procedure, the Court held a hearing with a commission of judges
formed by: Judge Sergio García Ramírez, Judge Leonardo A. Franco and Judge Rhadys Abreu Blondet. On behalf of
the Inter-American Commission there appeared Mrs. Lilly Ching Soto and Silvia Serrano Guzmán, specialists of the
Executive Secretariat; on behalf of the representatives, Mrs. Liliana Ortega (COFAVIC) and Marianella Villegas
Salazar and Messrs. Carlos Ayala Corao (COFAVIC), Willy Chang Him (COFAVIC), Francisco Quintana (CEJIL),
Carlos Miguel Reaño (CEJIL), Humberto Prado and Carlos Nieto, and on behalf of the State, Mrs. Luisangela
Andarcia, lawyer of the State Agent Office and Consuelo Cerrada, Director of National Prison Services, and Messrs.
Germán Saltrón Negretti, Agent; Alejandro Castillo, Director of Procedural Proceedings Bureau of the Attorney’s
Office; Roberto Acosta, representative of the Procedural Proceedings Bureau of the Attorney’s Office, and Reynaldo
Hidalgo, Manager of the Project for Prison Humanization.

Select target paragraph3