11 13. That even though the amounts of the compensations were set afterwards, it was the State’s obligation to determine and pay the corresponding compensations within a 6-month term as of the notice of the Judgment, that is, prior to August 7, 2001. Therefore, the calculation of the interests for delayed payments must be computed as of the expiration of the term mentioned in order to comply with the Judgment, regardless of when the compensatory amounts were set. Likewise, as stated in the previous Ruling of supervision of compliance with judgment in this case (supra Consideration 3), the State must determine and pay the interests generated during the time in which in incurred in delay regarding the payment of the arrears of salary and other benefits of Messrs. Manuel Aguirre Roca, Guillermo Rey Terry, and Delia Revoredo Marsano, pursuant to the most favorable domestic law applicable to the victims and observing the guarantees of the due process. The amount that the State already paid Mrs. Revoredo Marsano de Mur must be deducted from that determination. 14. That in relation to the obligation to investigate and punish the people responsible for the violations of human rights committed in the present case, the victims, their next of kin, and the Commission consider that the State has not complied with the due investigation, since it has not proven effective progress in this sense. On its part, the State has mentioned that in April 2005 the Peruvian Ombudsman considered that it corresponded to the Congress of the Republic to decide the initiation of the political trial against certain public officials, in order to apply political sanctions for violations to the Constitution. To this effect, the State had requested information in this regard to the Congress’ Council of Directors, without there being evidence of the results of that procedure. The Court considers that from the information provided no important progress can be concluded on the State’s part in compliance of that obligation to investigate and punish those responsible, since it simply reiterates that stated in previous reports, reason for which the supervision regarding this point of the Judgment must be kept open. 15. That the Court will once again supervise the general state of compliance of its Judgment of January 31, 2001, as well as of its Rulings of November 27, 2003 and November 17, 2004, and the present Ruling, once it has received the corresponding information on the matters where compliance is still pending. THEREFORE: THE INTER-AMERICAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS, in exercise of its powers of supervision of compliance with its decisions, pursuant to Articles 33, 62(1), 62(3), 65, 67, and 68(1) of the American Convention on Human Rights, 25(1) and 30 of the Statutes and 29(2) of its Rules of Procedures, DECLARES: 1. That the State has complied with the totality of payment of the compensations for the arrears of salary and other benefits that, pursuant to domestic legislation,