6. Regarding the information presented by the representatives concerning the failure to comply with some aspects of this measure of reparation (infra eighth and ninth considering paragraphs), the State indicated that, in its opinion, the said public act “complied with all the requirements of the judgment.” In this regard, the State mentioned that “not only had [it] held extensive discussions [with the victims and their representatives], but it had responded to all their requirements, including the program of the event, the place where it would be held, the level of representation of the State, the text of the plaque acknowledging responsibility, the speech of the Minister of the Interior, and even the paragraphs of the judgment which were read as part of the State’s acknowledgement of responsibility.”2 In addition, it asserted that “the State has complied amply, and even excessively, with all the agreements reached with the petitioners during the five meetings held previously, even at a very complex institutional moment as a result of the tragic accident […] resulting in the death of the [then] Interior Minister […] and the Vice Minister for Legal Affairs and Human Rights of the Ministry […] who was directly responsible for the organization of the act of acknowledgement of responsibility.” The State mentioned that “the Court must be aware that the Government of Mexico is making indisputable efforts to respond to all the requests of the victims and their representatives, even on aspects that are not necessarily specified in the judgment.” 7. Furthermore, the State indicated that “the absence of the victims and their representatives [at the public act of acknowledgement of responsibility] was based on their exclusive decision and responsibility.” In this regard, it mentioned that, in a meeting with the representatives on November 9, 2011, in response to the latter’s request that the then Interior Minister should attend the act, the State undertook to take the necessary steps to ensure his presence. However, in the State’s opinion, the assistance of other State officials, which the representatives were already aware of, complied with the ruling of the judgment concerning the “presence of senior national authorities.” The State indicated that, the following day, the decision was taken that the Interior Minister would attend the public act of acknowledgement of responsibility that, initially, was to be held on November 14, 2011. Nevertheless, on November 11, the representatives issued a press communiqué and informed the Court that the said official had “cancelled his participation” in the said public act. In this regard, the State indicated that, subsequently, the representatives claimed that there had been “confusion regarding the State’s position.” However, the State clarified that there was no confusion, because, during the meeting held on November 9, the State had undertaken to take the necessary steps with regard to the assistance of the Interior Minister. Hence on November 11, 2011, it confirmed to the representatives that this official would attend the public act of acknowledgement of responsibility but, to the State’s surprise, the representatives indicated that they would not attend the event. Following the accident in which the then Interior Minister died, on November 15, 2011, the President of the Republic issued a series of instructions to “the competent State officials,” among others, “to make every effort to ensure that the act of acknowledgement of responsibility is held as soon as possible,” and “to ask for the comprehension of the victims and their representatives in this regard.”3 Consequently, “for easily understandable scheduling 2 The State indicated that, inter alia, it agreed to the representatives’ request that the public act of acknowledgement of responsibility would be held in Atoyac de Álvarez, Guerrero, even though the judgment did not specify this; that the program of the said act was agreed with the representatives, and also the text of the memorial plaque that was unveiled, as well as the paragraphs of the judgment that were read during the act; also, the speech given by the acting Interior Minister “was submitted to the consideration of the victims and their representatives.” 3 In addition, the President of the Republic instructed these officials “to re-organize their agendas giving priority to the immediate satisfaction of the requests of the petitioners; to hold the event with the presence of even two State Ministers; to provide all the assistance that the victims and their representatives require for the event, and to request the support of senior authorities of the state de Guerrero to this end.” 3