3 advising the Court that “after overcoming technical obstacles [...] [t]he payments [of the compensation ordered] [would] be carried out by the Banco de Guatemala making deposits in the Banco Internacional de Costa Rica, so that [they could be] collected in this Bank’s agency in Miami […].” These deposits amounted to US$172,892.96 (one hundred and seventy-two thousand, eight hundred and ninetytwo United States dollars and ninety-six cents) and included the interest the State had to pay “because it had not complied with the judgment on reparations within the original time limit.” The State also advised that, on January 31, 2000, the Court for Criminal Judgments, Drug-trafficking, and Crimes against the Environment of the Department of Huehuetenango had sentenced “Vicente Cifuentes López, as the perpetrator of the crime of continuous assassination committed against Nicholas Chapman Blake and Griffith Williams Davis” to 28 years of imprisonment. 10. The note of the Secretariat of June 8, 2000, in which it requested the Commission and the representatives of the victim’s next of kin to submit detailed information on compliance with “each operative paragraph of the judgment,” so that the Court could make a final decision about compliance with this judgment. 11. The communication of the Commission of July 10, 2000, advising that the next of kin of the victim had received payment of the compensation ordered in the second, third and fourth operative paragraphs of the judgment on reparations, for the amounts and as mentioned in Guatemala’s biannual report. With regard to the first operative paragraph of this judgment, it indicated that the State “ha[d] only complied partially,” because only Vicente Cifuentes López had been convicted as a perpetrator of the “crime of continuous assassination” of Nicholas Chapman Blake and Griffith Williams Davis, and not other individuals who allegedly helped commit the crime and who had not been investigated by the State. 12. The note of the Secretariat of July 13, 2000, to the representatives of the victim’s next of kin reiterating that they should submit a report on the status of compliance with the judgment on reparations in this case (supra tenth having seen paragraph). 13. The notes of the Secretariat of August 16 and September 28, 2000, in which, on the instructions of the Court, it reiterated to the State the request that it present detailed information on compliance with each operative paragraph of the judgment in order to “adopt a decision on compliance with judgment in the instant case.” 14. The communication of Richard Blake of March 9, 2001, stating that Guatemala had not complied fully with the judgment on reparations as regards investigation of the facts and punishment of all those responsible, since it had not found and captured the other individuals who were allegedly involved in the disappearance of his brother. 15. The notes of the Secretariat of March 26 and June 1, 2001, in which, on the instructions of the Court, it again requested the State to submit a report on compliance with “complementary information on the other persons who were [allegedly] responsible.” 16. The brief of the State of July 3, 2001, in which it reported that “it had complied effectively with the compensatory payment to the next of kin of Nicholas Chapman Blake and also with the criminal prosecution of […] Vicente Cifuentes López, who had been sentenced to 21 years’ imprisonment, plus one-third, which