2. It will keep open the procedure of monitoring compliance with regard to the second and third operative paragraphs of the Judgment regarding the State’s obligation: (a) “To pay María Salvador Chiriboga, for fair compensation, the amount indicated in paragraph 84 of th[e]Judgment,” (b) “To pay, for the interest accrued on pecuniary damage, the amount indicated in paragraph 101 of th[e] Judgment” in consecutive tranches, as ordered in the Judgment on reparations and costs, and (c) To publish in the Official Gazette the operative paragraphs of the Judgments on merits, and on reparations and costs, and also paragraphs 2 and 3 of the Judgment on reparations and costs of March 3, 2011, making the clarification indicated in the fourteenth considering paragraph of th[e] Order. AND DECIDE[D]: 1. That it will rule on the measures of reparation ordered in the second, third and eighth operative paragraphs of the Judgment of March 3, 2011, when the State of Ecuador has provided information on the payment of the consecutive tranches that it must make on March 30, 2013, 2014, 2015 and 2016, in keeping with paragraphs 84, 101 and 102 to 104 of the Judgment, as well as on the publication of the operative paragraphs of both Judgments, as ordered in paragraphs 127 of the Judgment. […] 4. The brief of April 23, 2013, in which the State presented a report on compliance with the Judgment on reparations delivered by the Court in this case (supra having seen paragraph 2). 5. The communication of June 14, 2013, in which the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Commission” or “the Inter-American Commission”) presented its observations on the information provided by the State. 6. The communication of the Secretariat of the Court (hereinafter “the Secretariat”) of April 25, 2013, with which it forwarded the State’s report to the representatives of the victim (hereinafter “the representatives”) and advised them that they had four weeks to present any observations they considered pertinent. On June 4 and 17, and July 9 and 30, 2013, in notes of the Secretariat, on the instruction of the President of the Court, the representatives were reminded of the request that they submit their observations on the State’s report, the time frame for which had expired on May 23, 2013. On August 7, 2013, the representatives presented the observations that had been requested. CONSIDERING THAT: 1. One of the inherent attributes of the jurisdictional functions of the Court is to monitor compliance with its decisions. 2. Ecuador has been a State Party to the American Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter “the American Convention” or “the Convention”) since December 28, 1977, and accepted the contentious jurisdiction of the Court on July 24, 1984. 3. Pursuant to Article 67 of the American Convention on Human Rights, States Parties must comply fully and promptly with the judgments delivered by the Court. Furthermore, Article 68(1) of the American Convention stipulates that “[t]he States Parties to the Convention undertake to comply with the judgment of the Court in any case to which they 2