6 22. That the victim’s representatives expressed that they have not participated in or learned about the steps taken by the State to comply with operative paragraph two of the Judgment on reparations. Besides, they consider it inappropriate that, taking into account that the National Police is involved in the facts of the instant case, said institution should take part in the steps taken to contact the next of kin of the victim N.N./Moisés. 23. That although in its report of October 6, 2006 Colombia held that the Office of the Solicitor General of the Republic was taking steps to locate the remains of N.N./Moisés “but to no avail” (supra Having Seen clause 4), the State has not reported on the activities performed since the year 2005 to comply with operative paragraph two of the Judgment on reparations. * * * 24. That in the Judgment on reparations (supra Having Seen clause 2), the Court ordered the State to pay certain amounts of money to the victims’ next of kin and their representatives as compensation for pecuniary and non pecuniary damages and for legal costs and expenses (operative paragraphs five, six, seven, eight and nine of the Judgment on Reparations of November 26, 2002). 25. That in the Order issued on November 17, 2004, the Court required the State to report in detail on the measures adopted to comply with operative paragraph two of the Judgment on Reparations (supra Having Seen clause 3). 26. That the State informed that on November 1, 2005 it had paid the victims’ representatives the total amounts for compensation ordered by the Court in operative paragraphs 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 of the Judgment on Reparations (supra Having Seen clause 4). 27. That the victims’ representatives informed that on May 8, 2008, the funds corresponding to the term deposit certificate issued in favor of Johana Carolina Lizcano, daughter of Hernán Lizcano-Jacanamejoy, who has become of age, were collected. Likewise, they expressed that the remaining items “have been fulfilled as ordered by the Court” (supra Having Seen clause 5). 28. That the Commission did not refer specifically to this item but nevertheless observed that the payment of compensation to the next of kin of N.N./Moisés is directly linked to locating said next of kin (supra Having Seen clause 6). 29. That the parties are satisfied as regards the payment by the State of the compensations ordered in operative paragraphs 6, 7, 8 and 9 of the Judgment on reparations. 30. That the State must take all necessary measures to ascertain the identity of victim N.N./Moisés (Considering clause 18) and, as appropriate, proceed to compensate his next of kin, pursuant to operative paragraph five of the Judgment on reparations, and that, therefore, compliance with both obligations will be assessed on a joint basis.