6 payments (supra thirteenth considering paragraph). Consequently, Panama has issued three guarantee certificates corresponding to those payments which are ready to be exchanged and it forwarded copies of them to the Court. The Court also observes that, in two cases of victims who are recently deceased, the declaration of their heirs is pending and thus the cheques for the third payment have not been withdrawn. In this regard, it finds that, to date, 268 victims or their heirs have signed the agreements and 265 of them have received the third payment. 15. Based on the above, the Court considers necessary that, in its next report, Panama refer to the situation of the above-mentioned heirs (supra fourteenth considering paragraph) and clarify whether these two people have been able to receive the third disbursement. In addition, the State must submit updated information on the victim who signed the agreement but who, to date, has not withdrawn either of the two cheques in his favor. b) Regarding the victims or heirs who did not sign the agreements 16. Regarding the victims or heirs who have still not signed the agreements (second and fifth operative paragraphs of the Orders of October 30, 2008; July 1, 2009, and May 28, 2010), the State was asked to clarify whether the guarantee certificates issued correspond to the deposit of the cheques in favor of the said victims in individualized accounts and to forward the corresponding vouchers.8 In this regard, Panama advised that it had deposited the individual payments in guarantee certificates in the Banco Nacional de Panama. Based on the foregoing, the State presented copies of the guarantee certificates for the three payments, issued in favor of the four victims who had still not signed the agreement. 17. Subsequently, Panama reported that, in March and October 2010, two of the four victims or heirs who had not signed the agreement, signed it and exchanged the guarantee certificates issued in their favor for the first and second payments, and it presented copies of the cheques corresponding to the three payments owed to them. 18. Neither CEJIL, nor the Organización de Trabajadores Víctimas, nor the InterAmerican Commission submitted observations on this point. 19. The Court has verified that the State has presented copies of the deposit certificates corresponding to the three payments to the victims who have not signed the agreements and that, in their observations, the parties have not raised any objections with regard to the said mechanism for making the payments to the victims who have not signed; consequently, the Court will accept the issue of the said guarantee certificates for these victims who have not signed and for the victim who signed but who has not withdrawn the corresponding amounts. c) Regarding other aspects related to compliance with the judgment 20. With regard to the brief attached by CEJIL to its observations, without making any legal assessment or consideration (supra eleventh having seen paragraph and ninth considering paragraph), in which a group of victims or heirs represented by that organization questioned the Court’s approval of the agreements and, in general, the measures taken by Panama, the Court notes, as they themselves have indicated, that these are people who have signed the agreements. Regarding these objections and 8 Cf. Case of Baena Ricardo et al. v. Panama, supra note 6, sixteenth considering paragraph.