23 Mapiripán (supra Considering clauses 45 to 49), this Tribunal understands that the delay in the erection of the memorial, apart from the six additional months agreed between the State and the representatives at one moment, obeys to a legitimate interest. In this way, the Tribunal emphasizes the importance for the State to make progress in the compliance with this measure of reparation, given the real symbolic value that the same has as a guarantee of non-repetition of such serious facts in the future. Therefore, the Court shall continue monitoring compliance with this measure, and to that end, the State shall inform on the progress and the results obtained in relation to the commitments made. * * * Human Rights education programs (operative paragraph thirteen of the Judgment) 62. That as to the obligation to implement, within a reasonable term, permanent education programs on human rights and international humanitarian law within the Colombian Armed Forces, at all levels of its hierarchy, the State informed, at the hearing, that as of the delivery of the Judgment, the Ministry of Defense has carried out activities in this respect. It pointed out that a cooperation agreement was entered into with the United Nations High Commissioner on Human rights and three international consultants were hired to conduct a study on the training within the Colombian Armed Forces, which served as basis for the Ministry of Defense to design a “Comprehensive Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law Policy” in January 2008. The State explained, in detail, the activities to be carried out in order to adjust the training; it also emphasized the impact that this State policy had have and pointed out, as an example, that the Attorney General’s office received a considerable reduced number of complaints in the last year. Moreover, it informed that an office of human rights was created within the Army in order to ensure that this policy is internalized and it also mentioned that a cooperation agreement was entered into with the Inter-American Institute of Human Rights to oversight the progress in this respect. The State delivered, during said hearing, an exhaustive report on these programs and requested the Court to declare the compliance with this measure of reparation. 63. That the representatives noted, at the hearing, that in view of the fact that they have not previously learned about the programs mentioned by the State, they shall evaluate the material presented and submit to this Court their comments. Nevertheless, they emphasized the importance of the impact indicators, since the spirit of this measure of reparations is oriented to design a solid and timeliness educational process in order to guarantee the non-repetition of the facts. Furthermore, the Commission positively valued the measures in relation to the training of the law enforcement personnel mentioned by the State and emphasized that the purpose of this measure is not only to educate them but also to make them aware. It considers it is useful for the State to provide further information on the syllabus of the formal education that the members of the law enforcement personnel are receiving. 64. Moreover, the Court reminds the State that the education on human rights within the Armed Forces is vital to create guarantees of non-repetition of facts as the ones seen in the instant case. Therefore, it positively values the progress mentioned by the State at the hearing. Even though the Court agrees with the representatives in relation to the importance of impact indicators, it considers that the State complied with this measure of reparation, as to the design and development of