2 d) to Isaac Alonso Cantoral Benavides, in the form and under the conditions stipulated in paragraph 62 of this Judgment, the sum of US$ 5,000.00 (five thousand United States dollars) or the equivalent in Peruvian currency. e) to José Antonio Cantoral Benavides, in the form and under the conditions stipulated in paragraph 62 of this Judgment, the sum of US$3,000.00 (three thousand United States dollars) or the equivalent in Peruvian currency. 3. that the State [was to] pay the victim’s representatives the sum of US$ 8,000.00 (eight thousand United States dollars) or the equivalent in Peruvian currency in costs and expenses, in the form and under the conditions stipulated in paragraph 87 of [the] Judgment. 4. that through the procedures dictated by its domestic laws, the State [was to] reverse the verdict of conviction that the Peruvian Supreme Court delivered against Luis Alberto Cantoral Benavides, pursuant to the provisions of paragraph 77 of [the] Judgment. 5. that the State [was to] nullify any court, government, criminal or police proceedings there may be against Luis Alberto Cantoral Benavides in connection with the events in this case and shall expunge the corresponding records, pursuant to the provisions of paragraph 78 of [the] Judgment. 6. that the State [was to] provide Luis Alberto Cantoral Benavides with a fellowship to pursue advanced or university studies, in order to defray the costs of the professional degree that the victim elect[ed] to pursue, as well as his living expenses for the duration of the victim’s studies, at a center of recognized academic excellence selected by mutual agreement between the victim or his representatives and the State, in furtherance of paragraph 80 of [the] Judgment. 7. that the State [was to] publish, at least one time, in the Official Gazette and another newspaper with nationwide circulation, the operative part of the judgment the Court delivered on the merits on August 18, 2000, and make a public apology acknowledging its responsibility in this case, in order to prevent a repetition of these events, in furtherance of paragraphs 79 and 81 of the [...] Judgment. 8. that the State [was] to provide medical treatment and psychotherapy to Mrs. Gladys Benavides López, in Peru, in furtherance of paragraph 51 e) of the [...] Judgment. 9. that the State [was] to investigate the facts of the present case and identify and punish the responsible parties, in furtherance of paragraph 70 of the […] Judgment. […] 3. Paragraph 97 of the Judgment on reparations (supra Having Seen 2), which states that “[s]hould the State default on its obligation, it will pay interest on the balance owed, at the banking interest rate in effect in Peru for overdue payments.” 4. The briefs from the State of Peru (hereinafter “the State” or “Peru”), from the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Commission”), from Luis Alberto Cantoral Benavides and from the representatives of the victim and his next of kin (hereinafter “the representatives”), submitted in the time period between January 2002 and November 2003 in connection with compliance with the judgments in the present case. 5. The Order issued by the Court on November 27, 2003, concerning compliance with the judgments in this case, wherein it considered: