8 26. That the Court applauds the State's assertion in the Memorandum of the Meeting (supra Having seen no. 12) of its willingness to comply with still-pending operative points of the judgment on reparations (supra Having seen nos. 1 and 2), for which purpose it undertook to conduct a variety of procedures (supra Considering clauses 10, 14, 17, 21 and 25). It therefore encourages State authorities to proceed with the meeting as scheduled (supra Considering clause 10) and awaits reports from the parties on the outcome of the meeting and actions taken to complete the still pending items of the judgment, as the State has agreed to do. 27. That the States Parties to the American Convention that have recognized the binding jurisdiction of the Court have the duty to fulfill obligations set by the Court. This includes the duty of the State to inform the Court of measures it has taken to comply with orders given by the Court in its judgment. Prompt submission by the State of required reports informing the Court of its progress in complying with each of the Court-ordered obligations is critical for assessing the state of compliance in the instant case.7 Moreover, the General Assembly of the OAS has repeatedly stated that, in order for the Court to discharge fully its obligation to inform the General Assembly about compliance with its judgments, the States Parties need to provide information requested by the Court in a timely manner.8 28. That the Court will examine the general degree of compliance with its judgment on reparations once it has received relevant information on the items of the judgments for which compliance is still pending. THEREFORE: THE INTER-AMERICAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS, by virtue of its authority to monitor compliance with its own decisions and pursuant to Articles 33, 62(1), 62(3), 67 and 68(1) of the American Convention on Human Rights, Articles 25(1) and 30 of its Statute, and Article 29(1) of its Rules of Procedure, DECLARES, 1. That it will keep open the proceeding for monitoring compliance with the stillpending items in the instant case, namely: a) The reinstatement of María Elena Loayza-Tamayo in the teaching sector in public institutions, on the understanding that the amount of her 7 Cfr. Case of Barrios Altos. Monitoring Compliance with Judgment. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of November 17, 2004, Considering clause 7; Case of Cantoral Benavides. Monitoring Compliance with Judgment. Order of the President of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, December 14, 2007, Considering clause 12; Case of García Asto. Monitoring Compliance with Judgment, supra note 4, Considering clause 8. 8 General Assembly, Resolution AG/RES.2292 (XXXVII-0/07) approved in the fourth plenary session on June 5, 2007, "Observations and Recommendations on the Annual Report," Operative point 4 .