6 that the draft bills be made available to the indigenous peoples and that the State be required to submit “information regarding the measures to be adopted in order to enable said communities to take part in the process of legislative reforms.” 19. That a draft bill has been proposed to amend Article 173 of the Political Constitution of Nicaragua and Electoral Act No. 331. Notwithstanding, the Court has not been furnished with information on the progress made in relation to the work plan that was drawn up by the inter-institutional work team in order to consider the possibility of including said amendment bill on the 2008 legislative agenda. 20. That it is necessary that the State provide the Court with up-to-date information on the legislative measures adopted in order to comply with this reparation measure. * * * 21. That in Order of November 29, 2006 (supra Having Seen clause 2), the Court requested the State to submit up-to-date information on the compliance with the following operative paragraphs of the Judgment: a) Payment of compensation as pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages, which is to be paid to the YATAMA organization, which shall distribute it as appropriate (twelfth operative paragraph of the Judgment of June 23, 2005), and b) Payment of the amount set as costs and expenses incurred as a result of the proceedings started before the domestic courts and the Inter-American system for the protection of human rights to the YATAMA organization, which shall subsequently deliver to CENIDH and CEJIL such portion thereof as may be required to reimburse them for the expenses they incurred (thirteenth paragraph of the Judgment of June 23, 2005). 22. That in its report of January 25, 2008 (supra Having Seen clause 3), the State pointed out that “the Treasury and Public Credit Department was requested to include [the] amounts [corresponding to compensation] in the 2008 National Budget; notwithstanding [this] has not as yet been passed by the Legislative Assembly.” 23. That in their observations of March 11, 2008 (supra Having Seen clause 4), the representatives pointed out that “nearly three years have passed since Judgment was rendered and […] the State has not included said amounts in the 2007 and 2008 general budgets.” 24. That in its observations of April 11, 2008 (supra Having Seen clause 5), the Commission “reiterat[ed] that it is imperative that, pursuant to the pacta sunt servanda principle and in light of the time period that has elapsed, the State promptly adopt all such measures as may be necessary to fully comply with the provisions of the Judgment rendered by the Inter-American Court.” 25. That the State has not complied with the twelfth and thirteenth operative paragraphs of the Judgment. The State was to pay the amounts due as compensation for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages, as well as the amount set as reimbursement of costs and expenses within one year as from notice of the Judgment. Should the State