5 The States Parties to the Convention must ensure compliance with its conventional provisions and their inherent effects (effet utile) within their respective domestic legal systems. This principle applies not only in connection with the substantive provisions of human rights treaties (i.e. those dealing with the protected rights) but also in connection with procedural rules, such as the ones concerning compliance with the decisions of the Court. Such obligations are intended to be interpreted and enforced in a manner such that the protected guarantee is truly practical and effective, taking into account the special nature of human rights treaties4. 6. Those States Parties to the American Convention that have accepted the contentious jurisdiction of the Court are under a duty to fulfill the obligations set by the Tribunal. This obligation includes the State’s duty to report on the measures adopted to comply with such decisions of the Court. Timely fulfillment of the State’s obligation to report to the Court on the exact manner in which it is complying with each of the aspects ordered by the latter is essential to evaluate the whole status of compliance in this case5. A) On the duty to conduct the domestic investigations that are underway effectively and, if applicable, those opened in future to identify, prosecute and, when applicable, punish all those responsible for the extrajudicial execution of Senator Manuel Cepeda Vargas (operative paragraph eight of the Judgment) 7. The State made reference to several investigation procedures: it reiterated that, by the time the Court delivered the Judgment, the State was already aware of the fact that on October 14, 2009, a former Director of the DAS (Security Administrative Department) was implicated in the proceeding by means of an inquiry and in addition, on May 17, 2011, he was sentenced to preventive detention without the benefit of being released on bail for his alleged participation as instigator of the crime of murder. It also recalled what it informed before the delivery of the Judgment, as to the fact that on April 13, 2010, the investigation in favor of Edilson Jimenez Ramirez, a.k.a. "El Ñato", was precluded given that his death was proven. Moreover, the State informed that on May 3, 2010, the implication of another person in the proceeding was ordered, to whom one of the weapons used in the crime was allocated and on August 24, 2010, that person was sentenced to preventive detention. Likewise, the State informed that “[…] the Solicitor General's Office had ordered several proceedings in order to shed light on the existence of a "plan" intended to systematically murder the members of the UP, including Manuel Cepeda Vargas, as well as the alleged participation or conspiracy of civil and military authorities or state intelligence services.” 8. The representatives indicated that they positively valued the decision made by the Solicitor General by which a high-ranking civil authority was implicated in the proceeding as alleged perpetrator of the murder of Senator Cepeda Vargas. However, 4 See Case of Ivcher Bronstein. Competence. Judgment of September 24, 1999. Series C No. 54, para. 37; Case of the Girls Yean and Bosico V. Dominican Republic, supra note 1, considering clause six. 5 See Case of Barrios Altos V. Peru. Monitoring Compliance with Judgment. Order of the Court of September 22, 2005; considering clause seven and Case of "Las Dos Erres" Massacre V. Guatemala. Monitoring Compliance with the Judgment Order of the Court of July 6, 2011, Considering clause six. 3