7 judicial officials and health professionals in order to prevent the repetition of acts such as those that gave rise to the instant case. 20. Based on the information provided by the parties, the Court observes that the State has performed several steps to implement that ordered by the Court regarding the creation of training programs for the National Police and judges, and it initiated a training process in 2008 and 2009. The State indicated that these trainings would also be repeated in 2009 and 2010 so that the trained government officials would subsequently give the training to other members of the National Police and judges, respectively. In this sense, the Court considers that the execution of these trainings is inline with that ordered in this operative paragraph. In addition, the Court valued the State's initiatives to make the National Police's training permanent and that the implementation plan of the Organic Code of the Judicial Branch emphasizes the creation of a new Judicial School, with Human Rights as the general underlying focus. 21. Furthermore, with regards to the different actions to train the correction officers and health personnel (medical, psychiatric, and psychological), this Court requires a detailed update on the implementation of programs to train these persons, such as: a) the training modules designed for this purpose; b) who is responsible for the training; c) the persons who will receive the training; and, d) a timeline of activities that are planned for such training. 22. Lastly, the State reported that in 2007 it created the Ministry of Justice and Human Rights after the Judgment in the instant case was issued, which is responsible, among other things, for creating human rights training for government employees. The Court observes that the aforementioned Ministry has taken several steps, in coordination with other State bodies, to develop the actions necessary to comply with the instant operative paragraph. The Court values the significant advances to implement the trainings ordered in the Judgment. Given the State created the Ministry of Justice and Human Rights, the Court deems it necessary that the parties refer to the institutional activities that the Ministry is carrying out together with other state bodies as a means of implementing Operative Paragraph 13 of the Judgment. 23. Consequently, the Court deems that the State has partially complied with Operative Paragraph 13 of the Judgment with regards to the training of members of the National Police and the judges, and it awaits the information requested in paragraphs 21 and 22 of the instant Order. 24. Finally, the Court observes that, contrary to the representatives' claims with regards to being unable to access annexes 1 and 4 of the State report (which consist of four CDs), said annexes were sent along with the aforementioned state report to the representatives via a courier service on November 20, 2009. Furthermore, according to delivery receipt number 7823776144, the courier service was received by the addressee on November 23, 2009 at 09:13, and was signed for by T. Ryan. D) Regarding the obligation to pay pecuniary compensation for the property seized from Mr. Tibi (Operative Paragraph 14 subparagraph b) of the Judgment) 25. The State reported that on September 26, 2007 the Attorney General’s Office requested that the Central Bank of Ecuador transfer USD 117,137.55 (one hundred and seventeen thousand one hundred and thirty-seven U.S. dollars and fifty-five cents), but according to the State the transfer of funds on January 8, 2008 could not be completed because the account at Le Credit Lyonnais Bank was closed. It added that once this setback was resolved, on April 15, 2008 it asked the Central Bank of Ecuador to carry out the transfer again. This bank did so on the 16th of the same month and year; however, at that time the value of the dollar in relation to the Euro was lower. In this regard, the State claimed that they could not be held accountable