10 37. The President warns that this reparation measure must be implemented in accordance with the provisions of Title X of the Interpreting Judgment (supra Having Seen 2), and resolved that: 44. In paragraph 227 (g) of the Judgment, the Court noted that the State undertook to "ensure security in the eventuality that Carlos Fernando Jaramillo contemplates his return to Colombia on a permanent basis [and] facilitate the returning process to places of origin of the victims. " In light of these commitments by the State, in paragraph 231 of the Judgment the Court accepted the State's proposal and ordered the aforementioned measures as it considered that they are a means to adequately repair the consequences of the violations set forth in the Judgment, they are in accordance with the jurisprudence of this Court and represent a positive contribution by Colombia towards meeting its obligation to repair the damage caused. Therefore, Operative Paragraph 20, the Court ordered the State to "ensure security if Carlos Fernando Jaramillo Correa were to contemplate his return to Colombia" and in paragraph 231 set a deadline of one year following notification of the Judgment to fulfill the measure. Although the term provided for in the Judgment to comply with this measure is clear, the Court recognizes that compliance by the State implies, in part, that the beneficiary indicates their willingness to return or not so to Colombia. Therefore, the Court considers it appropriate to clarify that the State and the beneficiary must agree within the time stipulated in Operative Paragraph 20 of the Judgment all that is necessary to ensure compliance with the provisions, if Mr. Jaramillo Correa were to consider his return to Colombia. The Court notes the uncertainty regarding the date, if applicable, of return of Carlos Fernando Jaramillo Correa to Colombia could lead to complications in compliance with this measure. However, the Court considers that, if problems related to compliance with this requirement within the deadline arise, they must be resolved within the proceeding to monitor compliance with the Judgment. 38. Consequently, in accordance with information submitted by the State and the comments of representatives and the Commission, the President finds it necessary to have updated information regarding compliance with operative paragraph twenty of the Judgment. i) Convening a private audience 39. In monitoring compliance with the Judgment, the Presidency considers that further information is required regarding the State's actions to comply with the operative paragraphs provided for by the Court in its Judgment. 40. In this case it is appropriate to convene a closed hearing in order for the Court to receive, in accordance with the provisions of Article 69 of its Rules of Procedure,7 complete and updated information on the implementation of the reparation measures provided for in the Judgment and listen to the respective observations of the Inter-American Commission and the representatives. THEREFORE: THE INTER-AMERICAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS, in exercising its authority to monitor compliance with its decisions in accordance with Articles 33, 67, and 68(1) of the American Convention on Human Rights, Article 24(1), 25(1) and 25(2) of the Statue of the Court, and Article 4, 15(1), 31 and 69 of its Rules of Procedure, 7 Rules of Court passed at its LXXXV Ordinary Session, held from 16 to 28 November, 2009.