I REQUEST FOR INTERPRETATION AND PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COURT 1. On November 21, 2019, the Court delivered the judgment and this was notified to the parties and to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the InterAmerican Commission” or “the Commission”) on December 19, 2019. 2. On January 29, 2020, the victims’ representatives presented a request for interpretation of the judgment with regard to the following: (a) determination of the number of members of the National Association of Discharged and Retired Employees of the National Tax Administration Superintendence (hereinafter “ANCEJUB-SUNAT”) who were the beneficiaries of the judgment of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Republic of October 25, 1993; (b) scope of the decision taken by the Inter-American Court in the sixth operative paragraph of the judgment regarding the immediate payment of the concepts that remained pending under the provisions of the judgment of October 25, 1993, and (c) scope of the decision taken by the Inter-American Court in the eighth operative paragraph of the judgment with regard to the persons who will be included on the list that the State must create in order to execute the judgment fully. 3. On May 22, 2020, the State presented a request for interpretation with regard to the following: (a) the possible effects of the eighth operative paragraph of the judgment delivered by the Inter-American Court; (b) the list of other members of ANCEJUB-SUNAT who were not included as victims in the case; (c) the list of other persons who, without being members of ANCEJUB-SUNAT, are discharged or retired employees of SUNAT, and (d) aspects concerning the right to a pension. 4. On June 20, 2020, the representatives presented their written observations on the State’s request for interpretation. On June 29, 2020, the State presented its written observations on the representatives’ request for interpretation, and the Commission presented its written observations on both requests for interpretation. II JURISDICTION 5. Article 67 of the American Convention establishes: The judgment of the Court shall be final and not subject to appeal. In case of disagreement as to the meaning or scope of the judgment, the Court shall interpret it at the request of any of the parties, provided the request is made within ninety days from the date of notification of the judgment. 6. Pursuant to this article, the Inter-American Court is competent to interpret its judgments. According to Article 68(3) of the Rules of Procedure, when examining requests for interpretation and making the corresponding decisions, the Court should, if possible, have the same composition it had when delivering the respective judgment. On this occasion, the Court is mainly composed of the same judges who delivered the judgment the interpretation of which has been requested (supra footnote 1). III ADMISSIBILITY 7. The Court must verify whether the request presented by the representatives complies with the requirements established in the rules applicable to a request for interpretation of judgment; 2