the Sports Section, part 3, of the newspaper “El Comercio,” on Wednesday, December (sic) 16, 2011. She stated that “a judgment of the Inter-American Court against the Ecuadorian State for violation of human rights [is] very different from sports information.” 10. In its observations of January 18, 2013, the Commission indicated that the publication of the operative paragraphs of the Judgment “conformed to what the Court had indicated, so that […] the State had complied with the fifth operative paragraph of the Judgment.” 11. The Court notes that the State has advised that it published the operative paragraphs of the Judgment that were pending publication on March 16, 2011, in a newspaper with widespread circulation (supra considering paragraph 8). Then, in response to a request from the Court, it forwarded a copy of the publication which included the information that the Commission had indicated was missing (date of publication and newspaper in which the publication was made); in other words, the publication was made on March 16, 2011, in the newspaper “El Comercio.” Both the Commission and Mrs. Cornejo have stated that the said publication has been made, even though the latter indicated that she did not agree with the fact that it had been published in the sports section. The Court takes note of Mrs. Cornejo’s observation about the section of the newspaper “El Comercio” in which the publication was made. However, it also notes that the said publication was made in the terms ordered in the Judgment and in the Order of August 27, 2010. Based on the foregoing, the Court finds that the State has complied fully with the measure ordered in the fifth operative paragraph of the Judgment. B) To disseminate widely, within a reasonable time, the rights of patients, using the appropriate media and taking into account the legislation that exists in Ecuador and the international standards, in the terms of paragraphs 162 and 163 of the Judgment (sixth operative paragraph of the Judgment) 12. Regarding the sixth operative paragraph, the State advised that “it had awarded a consultancy contract in order to prepare a training module on the human rights of patients [and] that included the legal framework.” In addition, it indicated that it had taken steps through the Ministry of Justice, Human Rights and Worship to establish institutional cooperation agreements with the National Health System and to introduce the human rights approach into public policies, and mentioned different competences of the National Health Council in this regard. It also referred to the creation of the “Comprehensive Family, Community, and Intercultural Health Care Model (MAIS-FCI)” designed to allow people to control “health care factors” through processes of information and participation. The State also stressed the “intention” “to implement health care promotion strategies and actions, […] information and educational campaigns on the rights of patients, […] public policies with regard to health care […] with an intercultural, gender and human rights approach” and “the elaboration of protocols and projects that allow a broader dissemination and promotion of patients’ rights.” All of this “[…] seeks to ensure that health professionals are aware of both the national and the international laws in force on the rights of patients, and special health care brigades or groups will be created to promote and disseminate patients’ rights […].” Lastly, on December 2, 2012, the State advised that, in October 2012, the Ministry of Public Health had published an “important extract” from the articles of the Law on the Rights and Protection of the Patient in its Information Bulletin No. 008 entitled “Mi Salud” [My Health], in the newspapers, “El Comercio” and “El Telégrafo.” 4