12 reparation ordered in operative paragraphs [...] seven and eight” of the Judgment on reparations, and h) concerning the reimbursement of costs and expenses, the Commission commented that “the Bolivian State has [...] partially complied with the measure ordered in operative paragraph nine” of the Judgment on reparations. But relying on provisions of its own domestic laws, the State has still not reimbursed the costs and expenses ordered for CEJIL. The Commission therefore expressed the view that “in application of the principle of good faith, Bolivia should comply with its obligations in one of the [ways suggested by the representatives],” who “ha[ve] proposed concrete and reasonable methods through which this obligation can be honored, drawing upon its experience with other States.” CONSIDERING THAT: 1. One of the inherent attributes of the jurisdictional functions of the Court is to monitor compliance with its decisions. 2. Bolivia has been a State Party to the American Convention since July 19, 1979, and accepted the Court’s binding jurisdiction on July 27, 1993. 3. Article 68(1) of the American Convention stipulates that “[t]he States Parties to the Convention undertake to comply with the judgment of the Court in any case to which they are parties.” To this end, the State must ensure implementation at the national level of the Court’s decisions in its judgments.1 4. Because the judgments of the Court are final and not subject to appeal, as established in Article 67 of the American Convention, the State is to comply with them fully and promptly. 5. The obligation to comply with the Court’s judgments is a basic principle of the international responsibility of the State, supported by international jurisprudence which olds that States must honor their obligations under international conventions in good faith (pacta sunt servanda). As this Court has held in the past and as Article 27 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties provides, a party may not invoke the provisions of its internal law as justification for its failure to discharge its established international responsibility.2 A State Party’s obligations under conventions are binding upon all branches and organs of the State. 6. The States Parties to the Convention must guarantee compliance with its provisions and its effects (effet utile) within their own domestic laws. This principle applies not only to the substantive provisions of human rights treaties (in other words, the clauses on the protected rights), but also to the procedural provisions, such as the one concerning compliance with the Court’s judgments. These 1 Cf. Case of Baena Ricardo et al.. Competence. Judgment of November 28, 2003. Series C No. 104, para. 131. 2 Cf. Matters: Liliana Ortega et al., Luisiana Ríos et al., Luis Uzcátegui, Marta Colomina and Liliana Velásquez. Provisional Measures. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of May 4, 2004, seventh considering paragraph; Case of Baena Ricardo et al., supra note 1, para. 128; and Case of Barrios Altos. Compliance with Judgment. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of November 28, 2003, sixth Considering paragraph.