-15in which the payment of the compensations stated in the Judgment is made is established in the same and if they should reach an agreement on the need and convenience of making a change in this regard, it is necessary that it be communicated to the Tribunal, so it may evaluate it; h) deposit the compensation ordered in favor of the beneficiaries who are minors in a banking investment in their names in a reputable Colombia banking institution, in United States dollars, within one year, and in the most favorable financial conditions allowed by legislation and banking practice, while they are minors (twenty-second operative paragraph and paragraph 290 of the Judgment). In its report Colombia did not present specific information on this matter; i) adopt the actions necessary to find the next of kin of Messrs. Juan Bautista and Huber Pérez (whose second last name was possibly Castaño) and deliver the corresponding reparations to them. For this, Colombia must broadcast by a radio station, a television channel and a newspaper, all with national coverage, an announcement indicating that it is trying to locate the next of kin of said victims, to provide them with a reparation with regard to the facts of this case (paragraph 233 of the Judgment). The representatives argued that the copies of the publications sent by the State indicate that it only made the oral and written publications but not the television ones. The Tribunal asked the State to offer information in this regard, and to state if it made the publications on television and radio “on at least 3 non-consecutive days”, as established in the Judgment, since that information is not included in the certifications offered. Likewise, the Tribunal requests that the State indicate if it has adopted other actions necessary to find said next of kin; and j) reimbursement of costs and expenses (sixteenth operative paragraph and paragraph 285 of the Judgment). In this regard the State informed that it was carrying out “the budgetary procedures that permit payment,” thus it is precise that it forward updated information in this sense. 11. That it is still a concern for the Court that, according to the information provided, the representatives of the next of kin of the victims and the State do not agree on how several measures of reparation should be complied with, which could affect the development of the execution of the reparations, as occurred with the act of acknowledgment of responsibility (supra Whereas Clause 9(b)). In this regard, the Tribunal asks both the State and the representatives to try to observe a behavior that may lead to compliance with the Judgment. 12. That the Court will consider the general state of compliance of the Judgment on merits, reparations, and costs of July 5, 2004, once it receives the relevant information on the pending measures of compliance. THEREFORE: THE INTER-AMERICAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS, in exercise of its powers of supervision of compliance with its decisions, pursuant to Articles 33, 62(1), 62(3), 65, 67, and 68(1) of the American Convention on Human Rights, 25(1) and 30 of the Statutes and 29(2) of its Rules of Procedures,