-3eight months (supra having seen paragraph 1). In this regard, in both cases the Court ordered as a measure of reparation the payment of compensations by way of moral damages 12; and, in the case of Hilaire, Constantine and Benjamin et al., ordered the reimbursement of determined sums for costs and expenses 13. Likewise, in the case of Hilaire, Constantine and Benjamin et al., the Court ordered the State to process a retrial of the criminal proceedings conducted against the 31 victims 14, “submit before the competent authority and by means of the Advisory Committee on the Power of Pardon […] the review of the cases” of the said victims 15, and, in any case, it should “abstain from executing [the said victims…] regardless of the results of the new trials” 16. As for the case of Caesar, the Court ordered the State to “provide Mr. Winston Caesar, through its national health services, free of charge and for such period as may be necessary, such medical and psychological care and medication” 17. Likewise, in said Judgments, non-repetition guarantees were ordered, such as: the obligation to “abstain from applying the Offences Against the Person Act of 1925 and […to] modify said Act to comply with international norms of human rights protection” 18, “adopt […] such legislative or other measures as may be necessary to abrogate the Corporal Punishment Act (Offenders Over Eighteen)” 19 and “amend […] Section 6 of Trinidad and Tobago's Constitution” 20, and the obligation to bring the conditions of detention in the prisons of Trinidad and Tobago into compliance with the international human rights norms 21. As will be further explained, the due dates for the State to present its reports about compliance required in the Judgments of the cases of Hilaire, Constantine and Benjamin et al. and Caesar expired on July 5, 2003, and April 8, 2006, respectively. Despite the long time elapsed, Trinidad and Tobago has not provided to this date any information about its compliance with the Judgments, despite the repeated requests made by the Court or its President through notes of the Secretariat (supra having seen paragraphs 3 and 7) 22. 2. Trinidad and Tobago was a State Party to the American Convention from May 28, 1991, date on which it also recognized the jurisdiction of the Court pursuant to Article 62 of the Convention, until May 26, 1999, date on which the denunciation made by the State entered into force, pursuant to Article 78 of the Convention. Pursuant to Article 78(2) of the Convention, a denunciation of the treaty does not relieve the State of its obligations with respect to any act that may constitute a violation of said Convention and that has occurred prior to the entry into force of said denunciation 23. 12 Operative paragraphs 12 and 13 of the Judgment in the case of Hilaire, Constantine, Benjamin et.al, and operative paragraph 1 of the Judgment in the case of Caesar. 13 Operative paragraph 15 of the Judgment in the case of Hilaire, Constantine, Benjamin et.al. 14 Operative paragraph 9 of the Judgment in the case of Hilaire, Constantine, Benjamin et.al. 15 Operative paragraph 10 of the Judgment in the case of Hilaire, Constantine, Benjamin et.al. 16 Operative paragraph 11 of the Judgment in the case of Hilaire, Constantine, Benjamin et.al. 17 Operative paragraph 2 of the Judgment in the case of Caesar. 18 Operative paragraph 8 of the Judgment in the case of Hilaire, Constantine, Benjamin et.al. 19 Operative paragraph 3 of the Judgment in the case of Caesar. 20 Operative paragraph 4 of the Judgment in the case of Caesar. 21 Operative paragraph 14 of the Judgment in the case of Hilaire, Constantine, Benjamin et.al, and operative paragraph 5 of the Judgment in the case of Caesar. 22 The only communication made by the State, in both cases, was a request for an extension of the deadline to present information in the case of Hilaire, Constantine, Benjamin et al., on September 12, 2005. This request was granted through a note of the Secretariat on September 13, 2005 (supra having seen paragraph 4). Nevertheless, the State failed to present afterwards the aforementioned information. 23 Cf. Case of Caesar v. Trinidad and Tobago. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of March 11, 2005. Series C No. 123, para. 6, and Cf. Case of Hilaire, Constantine and Benjamin et al. v. Trinidad and Tobago. Monitoring Compliance with judgment. Order of the Court of November 27, 2003, second and third considering paragraphs.