24 the State clearly demands it, the jurisprudence of the Inter-American System indicates that this is not an excuse based on which the State can fail to comply with that ordered in the Judgment by the Court. In its subsequent observations the Commission limited itself to stating that “it hopes that the obstacles that have presented themselves in the present case can be overcome as soon as possible.” 60. That the Court appreciates the State’s actions tending to comply with this operative paragraph, specifically its inclusion of the corresponding budgetary item to make the payments. The Tribunal considers that the State has partially complied with this obligation regarding payment for the concept of non-pecuniary damages set in favor of the next of kin of the victims, and assesses that, even though made outside of the terms set in the Judgment, the majority of the beneficiaries has received the totality or the majority of the payments that correspond to them. There is no controversy specifically in what refers to the delivery of the payments, except regarding the exchange rate used, the delayed payment interests accrued, and the way in which the calculations were made, and the procedures through which they were made effective (infra Considering Clauses 62 through 80). 61. That on the other hand, it is necessary to require that the State complete, as soon as possible, the study and evaluation of the corresponding documents in what refers to the beneficiaries of the compensations for non-pecuniary damages who are not mentioned in the Judgment and who were later identified within the term established to that effect, according to that established in paragraph 237 of the same. Once said exam has been completed, the State shall make effective the payments in their favor. On the other hand the State shall complete the payments for the concept of pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages suffered by the 43 victims who either disappeared or were deprived of their life, which correspond to their next of kin in their nature of successors, in the terms established in the Judgment. The State shall inform of all the aforementioned, as well as with regard of the people who have come forward to claim compensations under the assumptions of the Judgment, the cases in which the status of beneficiaries has been acknowledged or denied, and, in each case, the criteria applied. b) Interests on delayed payments 62. That with regard to payment of the interests on delayed payments, the State informed of a series of steps taken, assuming that the delay in payment had generated interests on delayed payments. At the same time, the State pointed out that, according to Article 177 of the Administrative Proceedings Code, along with Article 60 of law 446 of 1998, the causing of interests ceases after six months computed as of the execution of the decision if the beneficiaries do not present themselves before the entity responsible for making it effective, along with the documents required for that effect.” The State added that at a meeting held on June 22, 2007 it informed the representatives they should present the documents necessary for payment before the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Justice and they were required to do so. At the time of the consignment of the resources on December 27, 2007 at the Banco Agrario, it made the corresponding update according to Article 178 of the Contentious Code, that is, using as a base the index of prices to consumers. It added that on February 20, 2008 the representatives had not yet fulfilled that requirement and that it therefore could not demand interests on delayed payments for the period that had gone by up to December 27, 2007. Thus, it stated “that it will acknowledge in good faith the interests on delayed payments according to the regulations stated and taking into account that