4 Judge Quiroga Medina and Judge ad hoc Rodríguez Pinzón advised the Court of their Partially Dissenting Opinions and Judge Ventura Robles advised the Court of his Concurring Opinion, which accompany [the] Judgment. 2. The 13th and 18th of June, August 19th, and September 2nd, 2008, the Republic of Ecuador (hereinafter “the State” or “Ecuador”),3 and the 6th and 13th of June, November 5th and 25th, and December 2nd, 2008, the representatives4 informed the Court of the different actions carried out in order to reach an agreement, pursuant with that ordered in the Judgment on the Merits. Subsequently, on November 25, 2008 the State requested an “extension of the six-month term stated in paragraphs 134 and 4 of the dispositive part of the [J]udgment.” In this regard, on December 9, 2008, the Secretariat of the Court (hereinafter “the Secretariat”), following the instructions of the then President, in consultation with the Full Court, granted the extension requested to the State and the victim’s representatives (hereinafter “the representatives”) until February 15, 2009, so they could continue with the process of reaching an agreement. Upon the conclusion of this term, through communications of February 15, and 26, 2009, the representatives and the State, respectively, agreed in stating to the Court that, within the term granted in the Judgment and the extension of the term granted to that effect, it was not possible to reach an agreement. Therefore, the representatives and the State awaited a determination from the Court. 3. Given the aforementioned, on March 10, 2009, the Secretariat, following the instructions of the then President of the Court and in consultation with the Judges of the Tribunal, informed the parties that pursuant with paragraph 134 of the Judgment and the fourth operative judgment of the Ruling, it decided to continue with the reparations stage, pursuant with Articles 63(1) of the American Convention and 57(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court (hereinafter “the Rules of Procedure”). Additionally, it stated that: [i]n the processing of the reparations stage, the Court will take into account the previous actions within the proceedings and will examine the evidence included in the body of evidence, considered as a whole within the case’s proceedings, which must be considered by the representatives, the […] State, and the Commission when presenting their corresponding briefs before this Tribunal. Therefore, the following steps will be taken: a) Require that the victims’ representatives present, no later than April 13, 2009, a brief in which they refer technically, precisely, and clearly to their claims of reparations, as well as, if it were the case, the evidence they consider appropriate; b) Require that the State, within a one-month term, computed as of the receipt of the brief of the victims’ representatives, present its observations in a technical, precise, and clear manner to the claims made by the representatives, as well as, if it were the case, the evidence considered appropriate; and c) Require that the Commission forward, within a two-week term, its observations to the briefs presented by the representatives and the Honorable State. 3 The State appointed Erick Roberts, Assistant Director of Human Rights of the Attorney General of the State, as Main Agent, and Rodrigo Durango Cordero as Deputy Agent. 4 The representatives of the victim are: Alejandro Ponce Martínez and Alejandro Ponce Villacís.