6 foreigners “in transit,” which constituted an exception to birth right citizenship, in relation to this operative paragraph (infra Considering Clause 21), and the State reported that it would submit more information on the domestic laws that amend this concept. 18. The Court observes that, through the communications of July 30 and October 2, 2009 (supra Having Seen 8 and 9), it requested the State to submit an updated and detailed report on the outstanding operative paragraphs of the Judgment, and to provide specific information on the following aspects: “a) birth certificates: i) how many of the void certificates affect Haitian descendants, and ii) the 2007 guidelines that allow an investigation to be opened to turn down or revoke citizenship that has already been acquired; b) the entry of Haitian descendants: i) information on how many Haitian descendants have been registered, and ii) how many have been excluded; and c) Article 11 of the Constitution of the Dominican Republic: i) the laws that regulate said article, and ii) the judicial decisions issued in relation to Article 11 of the Constitution.” 19. From the information submitted by the State in response to the requested points mentioned above, it provided a power point table, showing that 771 Civil Registry records have been made for sons and daughters of foreigners in 2009, 559 in 2008, and 56 in 2007, of which 716, 495, and 32, respectively, had at least one Haitian parent. However, this document only compiled these statistics, without directly addressing points a) or c) formulated by the Court in its communication of July 30, 2009. In the same communication the State stated that “Dominican lawmakers are currently working on amending the Dominican Constitution, therefore there is no final text for this legal instrument.” 20. Subsequently, in the report dated September 14, 2009, the State expressed that “it made amendments to its legislation, specifically to the laws applicable to the late registration of births, while the case was being heard by bodies of the Inter-American System for the Protection of Human Rights.” In addition, it submitted the following documentation on domestic laws related to operative paragraph eight: a) Resolution No. 45-2008 of October 3, 2008, which regulates the requirements and instruments to grant late registration of births to those people with ID cards, over 60 years of age, and whose ID only states the maternal surname. The person’s “Personal ID card” (Old ID) is required, or, the identification and voting card, as well as the ID of “the person who will execute the [birth] registration, preferably a relative” and “[a]ny other document that confirms the identity of the person being registered,” such as marriage, birth, or baptism certificates. It states that the mother of the person being registered may attend and make the registration […] even if she does not have an ID and voting card” and that if the mother has passed away the corresponding certificate must be presented; b) Guidelines for the Functioning of the Central Unit of Late Registrations of Birth of October 22, 2008, which state the Central Unit’s powers, the requirements and procedures for late births of birth for boys and girls under 12 years old, 13 to 16 years old, and over 16 years old. It provides for the verification, through the Central Unit, of the information submitted by the applicants. It states that the Central Unit of Late Registrations coordinates all that concerns late certificates of birth of minors and adults, the Unit’s organization, and the obligation to verify, purge, supervise, investigate, and review late registrations, as well as to comply with the requirements for late registrations. It also states that “all that is not provided for” under this law shall be referred to the Central Electoral Board, and c) Law No. 218-07 of August 14, 2007, on the Amnesty of the Late Registration of Birth, which states that during a three year period as of the enactment of this law, all