30 refer to justice at the international level, before the two instances: the Commission and the Court.62 87. To this end, the Court considers that, in reimbursement of the expenses and costs generated in the domestic jurisdiction and in the inter-American jurisdiction, it is fair to recognize to the victim and his representatives -the Fundación Ecuménica para el Desarrollo y la Paz (FEDEPAZ), the Center for Justice and International Law (CEJIL) and Human Rights Watch/Americas-, the sum of US$8.000,00 (eight thousand dollars of United States of America). XI METHOD OF COMPLIANCE Arguments of the victim’s representatives 88. In their reparations brief, the victim’s representatives stated that the Court should oversee fulfillment of the present Judgment, particularly as regards the investigation and punishment of those responsible for the violations. Arguments of the Commission 89. The Commission had not comments in this regard. The State’s arguments63 90. In its brief of conclusions, the State expressed its willingness to abide by the decisions of the Court and to recognize the “legality and executability” of the judgment on the merits that the Court delivered on August 18, 2000, and of the present Judgment on reparations. However, it told the Court that it would have difficulty complying with the Judgment on reparations, because Mr. Cantoral Benavides is living in Brazil and “the only way the Peruvian State can fully comply with a reparation intended to remedy the damage caused would be if the petitioner were living within the national territory.” The Court’s comments 91. To comply with the present Judgment, the State will be required to pay compensatory damages, costs and expenses and adopt the other measures ordered, within six months of the date of this Judgment’s notification. 92. The payment of the compensations ordered for the victim and his next of kin, as applicable, will be made directly to them. Should any one of them die, the payment will be made to his/her heirs. 93. The payments ordered for reimbursement of expenses and costs incurred as a result of the representations made by the victim’s representatives in the domestic 62 Cf. Mayagna (Sumo) Awas Tingni Community Case, supra note 3, paragraph 168; Cesti Hurtado Case. Reparations, supra note 2, paragraph 72; and The “Street Children” Case (Villagrán Morales et al.). Reparations, supra note 2, paragraph 108. 63 See paragraph 45 of this Judgment.