8 Therefore, the Commission acknowledges that this aspect of the reparation has been fulfilled, and ii. in relation to the publication in France, the Commission urges the State to take into account the information furnished by the victim to comply with said obligation and make the publication. e) as regards to payment of compensations: the State has not complied with this obligation and the Commission is waiting for it to be fulfilled. f) as regard the return of property seized from Mr. Daniel David Tibi at the time of his detention: i. it is essential for Mr. Daniel David Tibi to have direct access to the jewels described in the aforementioned affidavit, and the State should facilitate said access; ii. it is necessary to return the amount corresponding to the value of the stones and the Volvo vehicle at the time they were seized from Mr. Tibi, and iii. in light of the difficulties faced in returning the property, the Commission deems it relevant to resort to the option included in the Judgment according to which Mr. Tibi must be compensated for the property and other items that were seized from him, as soon as possible. CONSIDERING: 1. That one of the powers inherent to the jurisdictional functions of the Court is to monitor compliance with its decisions. 2. That Ecuador has been a State Party to the American Convention since December 28, 1977 and recognized the adjudicatory jurisdiction of the Court on July 24, 1984. 3. That Article 68(1) of the American Convention provides that "[t]he States Parties to the Convention undertake to comply with the judgment of the Court in any case to which they are parties." To this end, the States must ensure the implementation of the decisions of the Court at the domestic level.1 4. That, in view of the final and unappealable nature of the judgments of the Court, as established in Article 67 of the American Convention, the State should comply with them fully and promptly. 5. That the obligation to comply with the decisions contained in the judgments of the Court dovetails with a basic principle of the law of the international responsibility of the State, supported by international case law, according to which a State must 1 Cf. Case of the “Five Pensioners”. Monitoring Compliance with Judgment. Order of the InterAmerican Court of Human Rights of July 4, 2006, Considering clause No. 3; Case of Bámaca-Velásquez. Monitoring Compliance with Judgment. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of July 4, 2006, Considering clause No. 3; and Case of the "Juvenile Reeducation Institute". Monitoring Compliance with Judgment. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of July 4, 2006, Considering clause No. 3.