7 6. The State is to pay attorneys’ fees to Drs. CARLOS VARELA-ALVAREZ and DIEGO JORGE LAVADO, which combined are to be equal to 15% of the total compensation. The compensation is to be paid in cash, in dollars or the equivalent in pesos at the time of payment, and may not be paid in public debt bonds or any other instrument of that nature. 28. Argentina made no observations on these claims. 29. On September 25, 1997, the President of the Court addressed the Commission and the State to request that they send summaries of the victims’ police records and any information concerning the two children one of the victims was alleged to have. 30. On January 20, 1998, a public hearing was held at the seat of the Court to hear the arguments of the parties and of their victims’ families concerning reparations. There appeared before the Court: For the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights: David J. Padilla, Deputy Executive Secretary, Ariel Dulitzky, Assistant, Marcela Matamoros, Assistant, Mario López-Garelli, Attorney; For the State: Zelmira Mireya Emilse Regazzoli, Agent, Marcela Berutti, staff member of the General Human Rights Office; For the victims’ relatives Carlos Varela-Alvarez, Representative and Attorney. 31. In the course of the hearing, the parties and the representative of the victims’ relatives agreed that the Court could use the evidence brought before the arbitral tribunal that met in Mendoza in June of 1996 (supra, 17-21). 32. At the January 20, 1998 hearing, the petition of the Inter-American Commission was as follows: Mr. President, the position of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in the instant case is that the decision of the arbitral tribunal was not manifestly arbitrary. Mr. President, the position of the Commission on this point concurs with that of the honorable Argentine Government. ... The decision of the arbitral tribunal constituted for that purpose is in conformity with the pertinent rules and should be observed by the parties … the report of the ad hoc Commission should be widely circulated both by the Argentine State and by the Province of Mendoza. Finally, the recommendations contained in that report should be monitored until the authorities of the Province of Mendoza have fully executed them.