6 the translation of the Judgment into the K’iche’ language by the Academy of Mayan Languages, “it was then broadcast on Radio Quiché 90.7 FM on June 27 and July 4, 2010 from 3:00 to 4:00 pm.” Regarding both broadcasts, the State submitted a CD and a certificate for each broadcast. The State added that “[that radio station] was chosen because it has coverage in all municipal areas in the Department of Quiché, as well as in [the Departments] of Baja Verapaz, Sololá, Guatemala, Totonicapán, Huehuetenango, Chimaltenango, and San Marcos.” 23. The representatives noted they “did not have any observations” regarding the State’s information, and that this point “had been satisfactorily complied with.” 24. For its part, the Commission appreciated that the State had fully complied with this point. 25. The Court observes that the State has provided documentation and recordings as evidence of the radio broadcast of the Judgment in K’iche’ and Spanish on Radio Quiché 90.7 FM. In this respect, the Court deems that the State has fully complied with this reparation measure. E) Regarding the obligation to reimburse legal costs and expenses (Operative Paragraphs 14 of the Judgment) 26. The State reported that with the support of the National Compensation Program, on December 22, 2009, Ms. Victoriana Tiu Tojín was paid the amount specified in the Judgment. On December 22, 2009, the State presented a copy of the record of the “Judgment Compliance Settlement of November [26, 2008], as dictated by the InterAmerican Court,” corresponding to “File No. 14-01-1103." The State also specified that “when paying compensation for pecuniary, [...] non-pecuniary damages, costs, and expenses stemming from obligations acquired before bodies of the Inter-American system [...], it has incorporated in the corresponding clause of the Judgment Compliance Settlement that the beneficiary or beneficiaries "agree not to file any other future monetary claims relating to this case and to abstain from initiating any judicial, extrajudicial, or administrative actions before national or international bodies against the State of Guatemala for this act.” According to the State, “the specific function of incorporating the aforementioned clause relates to administrative and financial oversight that make it possible to determine if the person in question was paid economic reparations.” Similarly, the State indicated that “all State institutions are subject to auditing by the National Comptroller General’s Office for the income and expenses they incur through fulfilling their obligations. Thus, at no point are the merits of the proceeding mentioned.” 27. The representatives noted they “did not have any observations” regarding the State’s information as this obligation issued by the Court “had been satisfactorily complied with.” Although at one point representatives manifested their doubt regarding the settlement signed by Victoriana Tiu Tojín, considering that "if interpreted literally, it would appear that the beneficiary is automatically submitting not a settlement for the reimbursement of costs and expenses, but rather a settlement for the whole case," at a later date, they stated that, based on the clarification made by the State regarding the aforementioned settlement clause, "there was [no longer] any doubt regarding [the] matter." The Commission noted that “it could understand that when the State created the 28. settlement agreement, it necessarily did so with the intention of being consistent with the object and end goal of the [J]udgment of the Court, as well as its obligations under the American Convention. In that regard, the settlement mentioned here cannot be interpreted as impeding the fulfillment of the totality of the Court's orders.”