-9measure of reparation, which has included various meetings and coordination
between the State authorities and the representatives (supra Having seen paragraph
3(c) and 6(c)), and hopes that this reparation will soon be fully complied with;
(d)
That it provide, free of charge, through its specialized health institutions, the
medical and psychological treatment required by the next of kin of the victims (ninth
operative paragraph and paragraphs 277 and 278 of the judgment). The Court notes
with concern that the victims’ next of kin have still not begun to receive the medical
and psychological treatment that could contribute to the reparation of the damage
suffered. The Court appreciates that the State held a meeting with Mr. Carlos
Beristain, the expert who has evaluated or treated many of the victims’ next of kin,
in order to reach a better understanding of the nature of the psychological care
required by the victims’ next of kin. The Court recalls that, based on this expert’s
professional opinion, it established in the judgment that “psychological treatment
must be provided that takes into account the particular circumstances and needs of
each of the next of kin, so that they can be provided with collective, family or
individual treatment, as agreed with each of them and following individual
assessment.” The Court reiterates that, to comply with this measure adequately, the
State must take into account the concerns of the next of kin and ensure that the
professionals responsible for providing treatment have the specific skills required.
Furthermore, the State cannot allege the lack of available resources as an obstacle
to satisfactory compliance with the reparations ordered by the Court;
(e)
That it create all the necessary conditions for the members of the family of
the victim Antonio Flórez Contreras who are in exile to return to Colombia, if they so
wish, and cover the moving costs they may incur (tenth operative paragraph and
paragraph 279 of the judgment). The Court notes that the State did not refer to
compliance with this measure in its report (supra Having seen paragraph 3). The
Court reiterates the observations in its Order of February 2, 2006, to the effect that
the State must report on the completion of a risk and threat-level assessment in
order to determine the measures it will implement so that those family members
who so wish can return. In this regard, the representatives indicated that they had
reached an agreement with the State regarding the city in Colombia that would be
the subject of the study, and the representatives had informed the State in which
country the said next of kin of the victim Flórez Contreras were living currently
(supra Having seen paragraph 6(f)). The representatives have also stated that they
consider the investigation into the facts of this case to be a determining factor for
reducing the risk and the possible return of these next of kin (supra Having seen
paragraph 6(f));
(f)
That it pay special attention to guaranteeing the lives, safety and security of
those who testified before the Court and their next of kin, and provide them with the
necessary protection from any persons, bearing in mind the circumstances of this
case (eleventh operative paragraph and paragraph 280 of the judgment). In this
regard, the representatives referred to their observations concerning the provisional
measures ordered by the Court in this case;
(g)
That it pay the amounts established in the judgment for loss of earnings for
each of the 19 victims, the expenses incurred by the next of kin of eleven victims,
and non-pecuniary damages (twelfth, thirteenth, fourteenth and fifteenth operative
paragraphs and paragraphs 230, 231, 233, 234, 235, 240, 241, 242, 243, 248, 249,
250, 251 and 252 of the judgment). According to the ninth considering paragraph of
this Order, the State still has to pay the remaining 10% of the compensation. In