V OPERATIVE PARAGRAPHS 31. Therefore, THE COURT DECIDES, Unanimously: 1. To hold inadmissible the State's request for annulment of the judgment for alleged violations of due process and procedural fairness, in the terms of paragraph 14 of this judgment of interpretation. 2. To hold admissible the subsidiary request for interpretation of the judgment on preliminary objections, merits, and reparations in the case of Martinez Esquivia v. Colombia, presented by the State, in the terms of paragraph 15 of this judgment of interpretation. 3. To clarify, through interpretation, the judgment on preliminary objections, merits, and reparations in the case of Martinez Esquivia v. Colombia, regarding the State’s obligation to pay the contributions to Yenina Esther Martínez Esquivia's pension fund, in the terms of paragraphs 24 and 25 of this judgment of interpretation. 4. To dismiss as inadmissible the request for interpretation of the operative paragraph nine of the judgment on preliminary objections, merits, and reparations in the case of Martinez Esquivia v. Colombia, filed by the State, in the terms of paragraph 30 of this judgment of interpretation. 5. To order the Court Registrar to notify the Republic of Colombia, the representatives of the victim, and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights concerning this judgment of interpretation. 8