10 doubt or controversial. On the contrary, the claim is that there has been nonperformance of clearly stated terms of the judgment in question, such as the terms within which the compensation ordered by the Court should have been paid. Consequently, the Court cannot admit the Commission's petition in the guise of an "amplification" of the request for interpretation previously presented by them. 37. Nevertheless, since in the judgment the Court assumed the supervision of the payment of the damages fixed and indicated that the case would be deemed closed only after full payment was made (Godínez Cruz Case, Compensatory Damages, supra 28, para. 55(5)), it retains jurisdiction over the instant case and is empowered to decide on the consequences of the Government's delay in paying the assessed damages. 38. In this connection, the Court must point out initially that the delay is due to a situation attributable to the State of Honduras that continues to hold today. Despite efforts by the Executive Power -to which the Government has attested, as well as to its good will, which the Court in no way questions -the truth is that to date payment has not been effected. This is the responsibility of the State and the consequences of this inaction must be indemnified by it to ensure that the rights of the beneficiaries of the compensation are in no way disminished. 39. The Court must also note that the Government did not indicate at any time that it would avail itself of the option to pay the damages in six consecutive monthly installments (Godínez Cruz Case, Compensatory Damages, supra 28, para. 52). It also did not pay any of those installments which, in any event, are all past due. The basis for calculating the damages caused by the delay must, therefore, be the entire amount of the capital owed on the date it became due and payable, namely six hundred fifty thousand lempiras as of October 21, 1989. The statement by the Government that the amounts owed have not been delivered to the interested parties because they are awaiting the results of the public hearing, in no way affects the above conclusion, because, among other reasons, the publication of the decree authorizing payment appeared one year after the judgment ordering it and only a few days before the hearing in question. 40. It is appropriate, therefore, to demand the payment of interest on the entire amount of the capital due, at the regular banking rate in effect in Honduras on the date of payment. If such interest were to be set by the Court in the event that the Government opts to pay by means of six monthly installments, it shall apply, a fortiori, to the delay in compliance with the terms of the judgment. 41. There are, furthermore, other damages that must be compensated. These relate to the rights of the beneficiaries of the compensation and, where applicable, to the obligation of the trustee to take appropriate measures to preserve the real value of the sum received when it became due and payable, thus ensuring the fulfillment of the goal of restitutio in integrum for the injuries suffered. 42. In this connection, the Court remarks that one of the easiest and most readily accessible ways to achieve this goal, namely the conversion of the amount received into one of the so-called hard currencies, has been severely impaired as a result of the lempira's loss of value against the United States dollar in the open exchange market since the date on which payment should have been effected. This real loss must be compensated by the Government, in addition to the current bank interest payable, by adding to the latter the value of the loss between the date on which the