9. Likewise, the Court established the possibility, as an exception, of considering the admissibility of a request for support from the Assistance Fund outside the framework of the litigation on the merits of contentious cases, in the following terms: the Court is aware that the amounts ordered for costs and expenses in the Judgment issued by the Court in [the] case [of the Miguel Castro Castro Prison] did not include future expenses that the victims or their representatives might incur during the stage of monitoring compliance with judgment, and that Article 69(3) of the Court’s current Rules of Procedure allow the Court to summon hearings during that stage to evaluate the status of compliance with the judgment. Thus, the Court may consider requests for resources from the Assistance Fund outside the framework of the litigation of the merits of contentious cases, provided that the expenses are reasonable and necessary, and duly proven, so that the victims or their representatives who can demonstrate a lack of sufficient economic resources can attend a future hearing. 10 10. It is important to emphasize that, as the Court pointed out, the possibility that the Court or its President might consider the admissibility of a request for support from the Assistance Fund outside the framework of the litigation on the merits of contentious cases “will depend on the resources available in the Assistance Fund at the time when the request is submitted.” Therefore, the request “shall be assessed specifically, bearing in mind that the Fund is primarily intended to give preference to requests related to the litigation of contentious cases prior to the issuance of the Judgment.” 11. On this occasion, having regard to the resources currently available in the Assistance Fund, the Acting President deems it feasible to consider the request for assistance submitted by Mrs. Feria Tinta in the current stage of monitoring compliance with judgment, since this would not impair the attention given to requests for support from the Assistance Fund to cover costs related to an effective appearance and presentation of evidence at hearings before the Court in contentious cases currently at the stage of merits, and possible reparations and costs. 12. During the stage of monitoring compliance in the Case of the Miguel Castro Castro Prison two other factors arise which together influence the acting President’s decision to consider the aforementioned request for support from the Assistance Fund. The first is that the sum ordered by the Court in the Judgment for reimbursement of costs and expenses did not include any future expenses that might be incurred by victims in the stage of monitoring compliance with judgment. This Presidency also takes into account the fact that, according to the reports submitted by the State during the stage of monitoring compliance with judgment and the corresponding observations, more than six years have elapsed since the Judgment was issued, and Peru has not made any payment whatsoever to Mrs. Monica Feria Tinta as reimbursement for the costs and expenses ordered in paragraphs 456 and 464 of the Judgment. From that information it is also clear, prima facie, that Peru has not paid any of the compensation for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages ordered in Operative Paragraphs 18 to 23 of the Judgment. 13. In order to assess the admissibility of the request submitted by Mrs. Feria Tinta, this Presidency shall now determine whether the requirements established by the Court have been fulfilled (supra Considering para. 9). 10 Cf. Case of the Miguel Castro Castro Prison v. Peru. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of September 2, 2010, Considering para. 16. 4