6 violations of Daniel Tibi’s rights. Nevertheless, on the positive side, it stressed the State’s willingness to investigate and said that it was important “to have information on any actions taken by the State to ensure the respective investigations, and whether the latter had produced results that would allow it to be inferred that the Court’s requirements would be satisfied within a reasonable time.” The Commission made a similar comment in its observations of September 13, 2007. With regard to the decision issued by the Human Rights Commission of the National Council of the Judicature, in its observations of December 29, 2008, the Inter-American Commission “assessed the issues raised by that commission concerning the application and interpretation of the judgment of the Inter-American Court and the progress that this represents.” However, it “consider[ed] it necessary to have detailed information on [the] investigations that had been conducted or that are being conduced in relation to the obligation to identify and investigate the responsibility of all the persons who could have taken part in the facts of the case.” 10. That, based on the observations of the representatives and the Commission, as well as on the information provided by the State, the Court noted the investigation that concluded with the disciplinary sanction imposed on the First Criminal Judge of Guayas. However, although the Court appreciates the measures that the State has taken to comply with the tenth operative paragraph of the judgment, it also observes that the investigation into the facts of the instant case is still pending. Consequently, the Court finds it necessary that the State present updated information on the actions or procedures that it has implemented in order to identify, prosecute and, if applicable, punish those responsible for the violations committed against Daniel Tibi. * * * 11. That, regarding the eleventh operative paragraph of the judgment (supra Having Seen paragraph 1), in relation to the publication of the Proven Facts and the operative paragraphs of the judgment in a newspaper with widespread circulation in France, in a communication of April 9, 2007, the State reported that it would “continue making arrangements with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to comply with the pending publication of the proven facts, operative paragraphs and public apology in a [French] newspaper with widespread circulation in the place where Mr. Tibi resides.” In addition, regarding the eleventh point of the judgment (supra Having Seen paragraph 1), concerning the translation and publication of the acknowledgement of responsibility and apology in one newspaper in Ecuador and one in France, in the communication of March 7, 2007, the State indicated that this “had been complied with […] by a publication in the “El Comercio” newspaper on February 26, 2006.” However, on January 17, 2008, the State indicated that the cost of the publications in France requested by the Court was extremely high; it therefore requested the collaboration of the representatives to implement the operative paragraph in question. In a communication of May 22, 2008, the State indicated that it “considered that the proposal made by the representatives of the victim to publish in France only the text of the public apology was appropriate.” On September 9, 2008, the State reported that, on August 13, 2008, it had asked “the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to ensure translation of the communication with the public apology to be published in a French newspaper and to assess the cost.” 12. That, with regard to the eleventh operative paragraph of the judgment, in a communication of April 12, 2007, the representatives stated that the extracts on proven facts and the operative paragraphs of the judgment had not been published in a French newspaper. However, regarding the twelfth point of the judgment, the representatives expressed their satisfaction on the publication of the apology and the acknowledgement of