7 judgment.” The State indicated that “it [will] later send concrete information to the Court” about this point. 20. The representatives signaled that the State, effectively, made the payment of US $111,425.00 (one hundred and eleven thousand, four hundred and twenty-five dollars of the United States of America) but that, nevertheless, this “is pending the payment of the moratorium interests for the period of the first of January of 2008, until September 25 [sic] of 2008, the date on which the State subscribed to [a] payment agreement.”7 During the private hearing (supra Having Seen 8), they warned that “since September 25 [sic] of 2008, the State promised to […] make this payment as soon as possible […, as well as to] elaborate a report to fix the amount of the interest,” notwithstanding, almost two years have passed, “and there has been no contact with the victims nor […] an intention to make a payment.” Therefore, they consider that “this point is still not fulfilled.” 21. During the private audience (supra Having Seen 8), the Inter-American Commission reminded that “there is no contradiction in the sense that only the [payment] of moratorium interest since January through September [sic] of 2008 is still pending.” In this respect, the Commission warned that “it does not h[ave] any information about […] the plan of the State to comply” with this obligation. 22. Of the information provided, the Court verifies that the parties coincide in that the State made the payment of indemnities ordered for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages, as well as the costs and expenses provided for in the present case. As indicated in the aforementioned public deed (supra Considering 19 and 20), which are found in the case file of the Tribunal, the payment of moratorium interest relative to the period of January 1 through November 25, 2008, is still pending.8 In this sense, the Tribunal verifies that the State expressed its will to settle it (supra Considering 19). 23. The Tribunal evaluates positively the efforts of the State to comply with that ordered in the Judgment regarding the payment of indemnity for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages, as well as the costs and expenses ordered. Also, the Tribunal appreciate that manifested by the State during the private hearing (supra Having Seen 8), in the sense that it will soon comply with the payment of moratorium interest pending. In this respect, the Court considers that the State must inform about the time period in which it will fully fulfill this point of the Judgment. 24. In such a way, the Court finds that the State has partially fulfilled with the obligations established in the Operative Paragraphs twelve and thirteen of the Judgment. * * * 25. During the private hearing carried out in the present case (supra Having Seen 8), the State promised to send to the Tribunal, in a period of three months, the detailed and 7 Cf. Brief of the representatives of January 5, 2009, (File of Supervision of Compliance with the Judgment, Volume II, folio 594). 8 Cf. Public Writ number one hundred ninety eight (198) “Compliance with the Judgment of the InterAmerican Court of Human Rights and settlement in favor of the State of the Republic of Nicaragua in economic matters” (File of Supervision of Compliance with the Judgment, Volume II, pages 584 and 586).