11 representatives regarding the following requests: Ms. Victoria Margarita Palomino Buitrón asked that “the necessary facilities be made available to participate in a literacy program.” Emiliano, Rosa, Mónica, and Margarita Palomino Buitrón expressed their desire to transfer the educational benefit to their respective children in the form of a full educational grant for primary and secondary school studies at one of Peru’s public schools. Ana María Gómez Guevara expressed her desire to attend a technology institute to pursue studies in computer science and English, and, lastly, Rodrigo Esteban Palomino Buitrón, son of Ms. Mercedes Palomino Buitrón, requested a full educational grant for primary and secondary studies at a public school in Peru. 32. By virtue of the representatives’ remarks, it is incumbent upon the State to take all measures necessary and conducive to complying with this reparation measure, pursuant to paragraphs 145 through 148 of the Judgment (supra Having Seen 1). The Tribunal also stresses the importance of continuing to improve coordination between the State and the representatives in order to ensure effective compliance for all beneficiaries. Consequently, with the aim of monitoring compliance with this obligation, the State must provide detailed and updated information on this point and must show the specific manner in which the beneficiaries will be able to obtain access to these grants and the aforementioned programs. f) Regarding the obligation to adopt the measures necessary to amend criminal legislation to make it compatible with international standards on forced disappearance of persons (Operative Paragraph 12 of the Judgment) 33. During the private hearing (supra Having Seen 9), the State mentioned a agreement adopted by the plenary of the Supreme Court, as well as an amendment bill, in relation to which it noted that “there are no new developments to report [...] because Congress previously held a debate on this legal matter and discontinued the project.” In this regard, the State referred to the independence of powers in Peru and indicated that “unfortunately if Congress decides not to approve amendments to the law [there are no] coercive mechanisms.” 34. The representatives expressed their concern regarding the general lack of compliance with this reparation measure. In particular, they referred to Bill No. 1707/2007CR of October 11, 2007, which was presented to incorporate crimes against international human rights law and international humanitarian law into the Peruvian Criminal Code, including the amendment to the penal type of forced disappearance of persons, which "had been discontinued.” In this regard, the representatives referred to the Executive Branch’s authority to propose a bill on the matter. They also asked that the State be requested to “present an amendment bill for the penal type of forced disappearance of persons in accordance with international standards on the matter [...], pursuant to [...] Article 105 of the Peruvian Constitution.” Moreover, they referred to Plenary Agreement No. 9-2009/CJ116 of November 13, 2009, adopted by the Salas Penales y Transitorias de la Corte Suprema de la República del Perú [Criminal and Transitional Chambers of the Peruvian Supreme Court] with regard to the crime of forced disappearance of persons, and which is “binding on all criminal court judges in the country.” This Agreement “has caused worrying impunity gaps related to its temporal application and the fact the perpetrator is a public official, specifically with respect to events that occurred prior to April 8, 1991, the date on which forced disappearance was initially codified as a crime in Peru.”20 20 In this regard, the representatives pointed out that, pursuant to the provisions of the Plenary Agreement, prosecution for the crime of forced disappearance for acts occurring prior to April 8, 1991 is only possible if the