persons indicated in the judgment within one year of notification of the judgment and in accordance with the following paragraphs. 274. If the victims are deceased or die before they receive the respective compensation, the amount must be paid directly to the heirs, pursuant to the applicable domestic law. 275. The State must comply with its pecuniary obligations by payment in United States dollars or the equivalent in the Uruguayan currency, using the exchange rate in force on the stock market of New York, United States of America, on the day prior to the payment. 276. If, for reasons that can be attributed to the beneficiaries of the compensation or their heirs, it is not possible to pay the amounts decided within the time frame indicated, the State must deposit the said amounts in an account or certificate of deposit in the beneficiary’s name in a solvent Uruguayan financial institution in United States dollars and under the most favorable financial terms allowed by law and banking practice. 277. If, after 10 years, the compensation remains unclaimed, the funds will be returned to the State together with the accrued interest. 278. The amounts allocated in this judgment for compensation and reimbursement of costs and expenses must be paid to the persons indicated in full, as established in this judgment, without reductions for future taxes or charges. 279. If the State fall into arrears with its payments, it must pay interest on the amount owed corresponding to Uruguayan bank interest on arrears. IX OPERATIVE PARAGRAPHS 280. Therefore, THE COURT DECLARES, By four votes in favor to one vote against, that, 1. The State is responsible for the violation of the right to be heard, embodied in Article 8(1) of the American Convention on Human Rights, in relation to Article 1(1) thereto, to the detriment of the 539 persons who filed a petition under article 31 of Law 17,613, indicated in the Annex to this judgment, as established in paragraphs 133 to 143 of this judgment. 2. The State is responsible for the violation of the right to non-discriminatory treatment, in relation to the right to the procedural guarantee of an adequate reasoning, protected by Articles 1(1) and 8(1) of the American Convention on Human Rights, to the detriment of Alicia Barbani Duarte and Jorge Marenales, pursuant to paragraphs 173 to 175 and 178 to 185 of this judgment. 3. There are no elements to corroborate the alleged violation of the right to nondiscriminatory treatment, in relation to the procedural guarantee of an adequate reasoning, protected by Articles 1(1) and 8(1) of the American Convention on Human Rights, to the detriment of Oscar Eduardo Pivovar Vannek and Alba Fernández, pursuant to paragraphs 182 and 185 of this judgment. 94