5 15. That as stated in the eighth operative paragraph of the Judgment (supra Having Seen paragraph 1) the State should pay costs and expenses to Mrs. Martha Arrivillaga de Carpio and to Messrs. Rodrigo and Jorge Carpio Arrivillaga. That the State requested authorization from Mrs. Martha Arrivillaga de Carpio and the Center for Justice and International Law (CEJIL) to deliver to the first the amount that would correspond to the latter. That both Mrs. Arrivillaga and the CEJIL gave their authorization. That the State proceeded to deliver the first two fractioned payments of the amount corresponding to costs and expenses in favor of the beneficiaries. 16. That based on the above, the Court observes that the State has partially complied with the eighth operative paragraph of the Judgment on merits, reparations, and costs (supra Having Seen paragraph 1). 17. That the State must pay the beneficiaries the corresponding interests on loan arrears, pursuant to the thirteenth operative paragraph of the Judgment issued in this case, for delaying the payment of the costs and expenses set by the Court beyond the term established by the latter in the ninth operative paragraph of the mentioned Judgment (supra Having Seen paragraph 1). * * * 18. That the State asked the beneficiaries to present a proposal for the realization of the public act of acknowledgment of responsibility. That the representatives informed this Tribunal that all the beneficiaries asked “had no inconvenience in the fact that the act of pardon be carried out privately, in a meeting where the next of kin of all the deceased victims be summoned as well as all the surviving victims. This because they fear that the publicity could put the families in danger since the media could publish the amounts paid as reparation and they could therefore be victims of robberies, kidnappings, or others.” Specifying the position of the victims and their next of kin, the representatives indicated that: a) “[i]n the case of the next of kin of Carpio Nicolle and Villacorta Fajardo they all […] consider that it is not possible to carry out a public act if the State […] has not complied with the other operative paragraphs ordered by [the Court];” b) “[w]ith regard to the next of kin of Messrs. Rivas Guzmán and Ávila González, Mrs. Rosa Everilda Mansilla (widow of the first) and Mr. Sydney Ávila Hernández (representative of the Ávila family), […] they do not wish to issue any comment on this matter;” c) “Mr. Ricardo San Pedro has stated that he shares the decision of the Carpio family, as well as Mrs. Karen Fischer, her children, and Mr. Mario López Arrivillaga. Mr. Sydney Shaw, stated he has no interest in how the act is carried out,” and d) [t] Carpio family and the Villacorta family, as well as Karen Fischer and her children, Mr, Mario López Arrivillaga, and Mr. Ricardo San Pedro are of the opinion that the act of pardon, whether public or private, should be led by a high official of the Government, understanding as such the President or Vice-President of the Republic.” 19. That the public act of acknowledgment of state responsibility (fourth operative paragraph of the Judgment) is a measure of reparation in itself, regardless of the other measures of reparation ordered by the Court. Therefore, it is not necessary to wait for compliance of the other measures of reparation to proceed with the realization of the public act in question. 20. That pursuant to paragraph 136 of the Judgment issued in this case (supra Having Seen paragraph 1) the act of acknowledgment of responsibility, besides being a measure of reparation in favor of Mr. Carpio Nicolle and the members of his retinue that were executed,