9 made and expressed that it expects to receive information on any progress made in this important process of adaptation of military justice. 17. That the Court appreciates the information furnished by the State regarding compliance with operative paragraphs fourteen and fifteen of the Judgment, as well as the progress made in the study and preparation of guiding principles for the military criminal justice reform, among other initiatives. Nonetheless, the Court observes that, after almost four years from the date the Judgment was delivered, the proceeding to comply with these reparations is still at an initial stage and no substantial legislative progress has been made in order to bring domestic law in line with the orders of the Court. 18. That, additionally, the Court notes that objections have been made regarding the guiding principles set forth by the State in relation to the military criminal justice reform, basically as regards subject-matter and personal jurisdiction. In this regard, the Court deems it desirable to recall that in the Judgment it found that “should [Chile] consider that having military criminal courts is in fact necessary, their jurisdiction should be restricted to cases concerning crimes of a strictly military nature committed by military personnel in active service only. Therefore, through its own domestic laws, the State is required to set limits to the subject-matter and personal jurisdiction of military courts, so that under no circumstance may a civilian be subjected to the jurisdiction of military courts.”10 Therefore, if the modification of the domestic legal system to bring it in line with international standards on military criminal justice is to be consistent with the reparation ordered in the Judgment, the normative reform must respect said limits. 19. That, based on the foregoing considerations, the Inter-American Court deems it necessary that Chile: a) continue to furnish updated and detailed information on the measures adopted to comply with operative paragraphs fourteen and fifteen of the Judgment, including the forwarding of relevant documents; b) furnish special information on any progress made in the different stages and on the estimated periods of time to comply with the orders of the Court; and c) answer, in its next report, the comments included in the representatives’ briefs (supra Considering clause 15). * * * 20. That, on the other hand, in its communication of July 16, 2009, the representatives reported on a petition filed by the victim with the Contralor General de la República de Chile [General Comptroller of the Chilean Republic] “asking for the annulment of Order No. 228 of May 28, 1993, which provided for the early termination of his contract with the Armed Forces." Said petition is related to "the claims aimed at being granted the retirement and social security rights to which he would have been entitled if his [employment] contract [with the Armed Forces] had become effective.” The representatives sent a copy of Mr. Palamara-Iribarne’s petition and the denial of the Contraloría General de la República de Chile [General Comptroller’s Office of the Chilean Republic]. 21. That the Court observes that the representatives only mentioned the steps taken by their client and attached the aforementioned information, without including a legal 10 Case of Palamara-Iribarne, supra note 7, para. 256.