for the representatives of the victim and his next of kin to forward the documentation that confirmed the amounts of money that the family of José Carlos Trujillo Oroza (hereinafter “José Carlos”, “the victim” or “Mr. Trujillo Oroza”) allegedly failed to perceive, because they devoted their time to searching for him, as evidence to help it make a more informed decision. 23. On October 23, 2001, the Commission presented a brief in which it requested an extension until November 15, 2001, to present the information on the two questions that the Court had asked the State during the public hearing on reparations (supra para. 20). The requested extension was granted to the Commission, to the representatives of the victim and his next of kin, and to the State. 24. On October 29, 2001, Gladys Oroza de Solón Romero, the victim’s mother, presented a brief on reparations in the instant case. 25. On October 29, 2001, CEJIL, representing the victim and his next of kin, forwarded a brief in which it referred to the information requested on the amounts of money that the family of José Carlos Trujillo Oroza allegedly failed to perceive because they devoted their time to searching for him (supra para. 22). In this respect, it indicated that “the family [of José Carlos Trujillo Oroza] does not have documentation showing the earnings they failed to perceive during the past thirty years”, and therefore requested the Court “that it should establish in fairness the value of the pertinent compensation under this heading.” Also, with regard to Gladys Oroza de Solón Romero, it indicated that “one of the consequences of her untiring search was the loss of the position she occupied”, so that she retired “with a monthly income of 150 dollars”, while if “she had retired from the position she had at that time, as a teacher at the teacher training school (Escuela Normal), her pension would have been about 3,000 Bolivian [pesos], which amounts to approximately 500 dollars.” It also attached documents related to the information requested from the State as additional evidence (supra para. 21). On November 16, 2001, CEJIL presented the original of the said brief and its attachments. 26. On October 30, 2001, the State presented a brief to which it attached some of the documents requested as additional evidence (supra para. 21). It also forwarded information on “the criminal laws relating to the extinguishment of the criminal action and to the possibility of reclassifying the crime of homicide as the crime of forced disappearance of persons.” On November 19, 2001, it forwarded the originals of some of the previous documents. 27. On November 9, 2001, after evaluating the documentation forwarded by the State, the Secretariat granted it until November 23, 2001, to present the following information: description of the post of teacher-training teacher or professor; requirements for the post and specific allowances, if any, as well as any bonuses in force under Bolivian labor legislation; also, how to interpret the table entitled “Bolivia: evolución del salario mínimo legal por fecha de promulgación y vigencia, 1991-2000” [Bolivia: evolution of the minimum legal wage by date of promulgation and period in force, 1991-2000], presented by the State with the brief of October 30 mentioned in the previous paragraph, with regard to whether the total amount indicated by year in the column corresponding to the minimum legal wage referred to the minimum wage by month, fortnight, week or hour. The Secretariat also repeated to the State that it should submit information on the evolution of the