9 41. That the representatives indicated that “94.83% of adults from Kilometer 16 and 96.46% of those from ‘Santa Elisa’ now have identity cards. However, 16.67% of the children from Kilometer 16 and 18.92% of those from Santa Elisa do not have either a birth certificate or an identity card. In addition, several people […] have complained of errors in the documents issued.” They also, indicated that “[t]he way these documents are issued consists of organizing a trip to the Community for this purpose. However, this method is not sustainable owing to the high costs of a trip and the unrealistic nature of issuing birth certificates extensively, owing to the number of trips that would be needed each year to cover the births.” 42. That the Commission notes that the State has made progress in complying with this aspect. 43. That the Court notes the measures taken by the State and finds that it has complied partially with this aspect. The Court awaits information from the State on the measures adopted to document the percentage of people who have not been registered, indicated by the representatives, and its opinion concerning the unsustainable nature of the method used. * * * 44. That, with regard to the adoption of the legislative, administrative or other measures necessary to establish a mechanism to reclaim the ancestral lands of the members of indigenous communities, and that guarantees their rights over their traditional lands (twelfth operative paragraph of the Judgment), the Court decided that the State must indicate “all the administrative, legislative or other measures that it has adopted […], and the results of such measures.”13 45. That the State has not made any real progress. 46. That the representatives indicated that “[t]here has been no action towards the enactment of […] adequate legislation.” 47. That the Court does not have sufficient information on this aspect. * * * 48. That, as regards the publications and radio broadcast of the Judgment (thirteenth operative paragraph of the Judgment), the State informed that, on June 18, 2007, it had published the Judgment in the official gazette. The State also indicated that it “had approved […] the proposal […] made by the representatives of the victims, Tierraviva, when they offered a space to the State, free of charge, on the Pa’i Puku radio station.” 49. That the representatives stated that “[t]he fact that the State has decided to comply with the thirteenth operative paragraph is a step forward in compliance with the Judgment.” They added that “the publication in a national newspaper has not been made.” 13 Cf. Sawhoyamaxa Indigenous Community v. Paraguay. Compliance with judgment, supra note 5, fourth operative paragraph.