39. The representatives observed that the State has always insisted that Carlos Fernando and his family must first advise whether they wish to return to Colombia so as to, at that time, ensure appropriate security measures. They indicated that the reasons to fear for the life of the victims still remain, and that the State has not taken effective measures to truly transform the difficult conditions that exist in the municipality of Ituango. Consequently, they asked the Court not to place a limit on the time within which Mr. Jaramillo Correa and other next of kin who sought asylum in Canada can request security from the State to return to their places of origin. Subsequently, the representatives indicated that this measure cannot be limited to protection of the personal safety of Mr. Jaramillo Correa and his family in terms of a security plan, but rather this measure of reparation must include the creation of suitable conditions for their return and, if that is not possible, then the recovery of their socio-economic situation and their family group should be guaranteed, wherever they may be. 40. The Commission expressed its concern over the time limit indicated by the State and stressed the need to implement a mechanism for dialogue and coordination before their return to ensure a safe return. This mechanism must include the opportune design of the respective security plan, in keeping with the needs for protection. 41. The Court notes that this measure of reparation must be implemented in accordance with the provisions of Chapter X of the interpretation judgment (supra having seen paragraph 2), where it decided that: 44. In paragraph 227(g) of the judgment, the Court pointed out that the State has undertaken “to guarantee the safety of Carlos Fernando Jaramillo should he consider returning to Colombia permanently [and] to facilitate the process of return to their places of origin for the victims”. Taking into account the commitments made by the State, in paragraph 231 of the judgment this Court accepted the offer made by the State and ordered the said measures, since it considered that such measures constitute a way of providing satisfactory reparation for the consequences of the violations declared in this judgment, that they are in keeping with the Court’s case law and that they represent a positive contribution by Colombia to compliance with its obligation to repair the damage caused. Therefore, in the twentieth operative paragraph, the Court ordered the State “to guarantee the safety of Carlos Fernando Jaramillo Correa should he decide to return to Colombia,” and in paragraph 231 established the term of one year, as of notification of the judgment, for compliance with this measure. Even though the term established in the judgment for compliance with this measure is clear, the Court acknowledges that this compliance by the State implies, in part, that the beneficiary must indicate his willingness to return to Colombia. Therefore, this Court deems it pertinent to clarify that the State and the beneficiary must agree, within the term established in the twentieth operative paragraph of the Judgment, on the pertinent measures to comply with what was ordered, in case Mr. Jaramillo Correa considers returning to Colombia. The Court notes that the uncertainty as to the date, if applicable, of the return of Carlos Fernando Jaramillo Correa to Colombia may lead to complications in compliance with this measure. However, the Court considers that, if there are difficulties related to the method of complying with this obligation, they must be resolved within the procedure to monitor compliance with the Judgment. 42. Consequently, based on the information presented during the hearing by both the State and the representatives, as well as the willingness of the parties to reach agreement on the necessary and effective coordination measures to create security and socio-economic conditions designed to ensure the safe return of Mr. Jaramillo Correa and his family to Colombia, the Court awaits updated information regarding the steps being taken to comply with the twentieth operative paragraph of the judgment, as established above. 13