disappearance of persons for court officials (vocales), judges throughout the country, and members of the Police and the Public Prosecution Service, [with …] the active participation of all these institutions.” The State explained that the “officials of the Judiciary, and eventually of the Public Prosecution Service will have to be evaluated to decide whether they continue in [their] respective functions, [… and this] could have an impact on achieving the objectives of the course.” In this regard, in a brief of February 25, 2013, it indicated that the appointment of new authorities to the courts and to the Public Prosecution Service was pending, but that “the changes made within the structure of these entities permitted the incorporation of programs throughout the country to comply satisfactorily” with this measure of reparation. 36. The representatives indicated that the training programs ordered in the Judgment had not been implemented, and no budgetary allocation had been made in this regard. In addition, they stated that the above-mentioned appointments of new authorities to the courts and to the Public Prosecution Service “date from […] more than a year” and, nevertheless, the State had not been able to provide any evidence of having offered a single training course. 37. The Commission assessed positively that the President of the Supreme Court of Justice had asked the Institute of the Judicature to plan a training course on the proper investigation and prosecution of forced disappearances, and “hope[d] that progress would be made in the design and implementation of this training course as soon as possible.” 38. The Court appreciates the fact that the State has taken steps to implement training programs on the proper investigation and prosecution of acts that constitute forced disappearance of persons for agents of the Public Prosecution Service and judges of the Bolivian Judiciary. However, in its most recent report, the State indicated that the said programs had not yet been implemented owing to the changes that were being made within these entities. Consequently, the Court urges the State to implement the said programs and awaits complete and detailed information in this regard. The Court also recalls that the programs implemented by the State should train the said authorities in the use of circumstantial evidence, indications and presumptions, the assessment of the systematic patterns that can result in the facts investigated, and the finding of persons who have been forcibly disappeared. In addition, these programs should make special mention of the Judgment and of the international human rights instruments to which Bolivia is a Party.29 G) Obligation to pay the amounts established in the Judgment as compensation for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage, and reimbursement of costs and expenses, within one year (fourteenth operative paragraph of the Judgment) 39. The State advised that, on April 6, 2011, the Ministry of Economy and Finance had made a budgetary transfer in favor of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs so that the latter could make the payments established by the Inter-American Court in the Judgment. Thus, on August 11 and 26, 2011, the Central Bank of Bolivia issued payment authorizations in the names of Martha Castro Mendoza, Rebeca Ibsen Castro, Tito Ibsen Castro and Raquel Ibsen Castro for the amounts decided in the Judgment in their favor for pecuniary and nonpecuniary damage and to reimburse costs and expenses. However, payment authorizations were not issued for the heirs of Rainer Ibsen Cárdenas and José Luis Ibsen Peña for the                                                              29 Cf. Case of Ibsen Cárdenas and Ibsen Peña v. Bolivia. Judgment of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of September 1, 2010. Series C No. 217, paras. 258 and 259. 13