-6Moreover, in order for the Tribunal to be able to adequately meet its obligation to report to the General Assembly of the OAS regarding compliance with its rulings, the latter has stated that the States Parties to the Convention must provide the Court with such information as it may require in timely fashion.6 10. That the duty to provide information to the Court is not complied with merely through the formal submission of a document to the Court; rather, it is a two-fold obligation which requires in order to be effectively complied with, the formal submission of a document that addresses the topics that are the subject-matter of said obligation in a full, specific, certain, current and detailed manner.7 In this case, the State has failed to inform the Court in proper and timely fashion. 11. That with regards to the supervision of compliance with the judgments and other decisions, Article 63 of the Rules of Procedure states: 1. The procedure for monitoring compliance with the judgments and other decisions of the Court shall be carried out by means of the submission of reports by the State and observations to those reports by the victims or their legal representatives. The Commission shall present observations to the State’s reports and to the observations of the victims or their representatives. 2. The Court may require from other sources of information relevant data regarding the case in order to evaluate compliance therewith. To that end, the Tribunal shall also require expert declarations or reports it considers appropriate. 3. When it deems appropriate, the Tribunal may convene the parties to a hearing in order to monitor compliance with its decisions. 4. Once the Tribunal has obtained all the relevant information, it shall determine the state of compliance with its decisions and issue the pertinent orders. 12. That in the instant case it is pertinent and necessary to convene the State, the Commission and the representatives to a private hearing for the Court to receive complete and updated information, from the State regarding compliance with the Judgment, as well as the respective observations and comments from the Commission and the representatives. Therefore: The President of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, in accordance with Articles 33, 67 and, 68(1) of the American Convention on Human Rights, Articles 24(1), 25(1) and 25(2) of the Statute of the Court, and Articles 4, 15(1), 30(2) and 63 of its Rules of Procedure, Decides: 6 General Assembly, Resolution AG/RES. 2500 (XXXIV-O/09), adopted at the fourth plenary session, held on June 4, 2009, entitled “Observations and Recommendations on the Annual Report of the InterAmerican Court of Human Rights.” 7 Cf. Matter of María Leontina Millacura-Llaipén et al. Provisional Measures. Order of the Court of July 6, 2006, considering clause No. 20; Case of Cantoral–Benavides, supra note 2, considering clause No. 21, and Matter of Marta Colomina and Liliana Velásquez. Provisional Measures. Order of the Court of July 4, 2006, considering clause No. 9.