VIII MERITS 126. This case involves the alleged failure to execute thirteen final, non-appealable judicial verdicts in favor of a group of teachers. The transfer of teachers to municipal jurisdiction and their inclusion in the private law employment system during the military dictatorship in Chile meant they ceased to receive payment of a special allowance created under 1980 decree-law 3551. After democracy was restored, the applicants in this case sued the municipalities for payment of this allowance and obtained final, non-appealable verdicts ordering payment. Over twenty-five years later, the debts have still not been paid, and municipal assets are insufficient to provide the funds needed to meet these financial obligations. 127. Both the Chilean Congress355 and the ILO356 have upheld this obligation to pay the money owed to the teachers. Judicial decisions ordering payment have been delivered, but the internal institutional structure of the State of Chile has made it impossible to execute the verdicts or to provide these municipalities with sufficient means and resources to comply with the sentences leveled against them. Along the same lines as the arguments submitted by the parties and the Commission, this Court will proceed with a joint analysis of the alleged violations of the right to effective protection, the right to guarantee of a reasonable period, and the right to private property due to the apparent failure to comply with the final judicial findings in favor of the teachers who are the applicants in this case. VIII-1 RIGHT TO JUDICIAL GUARANTEES, RIGHT TO JUDICIAL PROTECTION AND RIGHT TO PROPERTY, READ IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE OBLIGATION TO RESPECT AND GUARANTEE AND THE DUTY TO ADOPT DOMESTIC LEGAL EFFECTS 357 A. Arguments of the parties and of the Commission 128. The Commission argued that the State had failed to guarantee the means to ensure enforcement of the thirteen judgments in this case, despite a broad range of actions undertaken to bring about payment (signed payment plans, requests for arrest warrants against mayors, lawsuits by the municipalities against the national treasury, and the like), none of which resulted in full compliance with the judgments. These actions, according to the Commission, did not prevail because existing regulations barred attachment of municipal assets designated for the operation of their services, and because the central government has refused to allocate the funds necessary for allowing the municipalities to execute the judgments. It therefore found that the State had also failed to guarantee execution of the judgments themselves, because the municipalities, regardless of their status as autonomous corporate bodies, nevertheless depended on the national government for allocation of resources. In the view of the Commission, this led to a situation that rendered the alleged victims defenseless and utterly unprotected and highlighted the need for the State to modify its internal regulations to ensure means of payment in the future. It therefore concluded that the State was responsible for violating Article 25(2)(c) of the Convention, read in conjunction with the obligations established in Articles 1(1) and 2 thereof. The Commission emphasized in its closing observations that States subject to judicial rulings against them must take whatever measures are necessary to ensure execution. 355 Cf. Chamber of Deputies of Chile. Report of the special committee on “historical debts,” supra (evidence file, folios 3 a 166). 356 Cf. International Labour Organization. Report of the Director-General, supra, evidence file, folios 168 to 198). 357 Articles 8(1), 25 and 21 of the American Convention, read in conjunction with Articles 1(1) and 2 thereof. 46