6. The States Parties to the American Convention are required to guarantee compliance with the provisions thereof and to secure their effects (effet utile) at the domestic legal level. This principle applies not only in connection with the substantive provisions of human rights treaties (that is, those dealing with provisions of the protected rights), but also in connection with procedural rules, such as those concerning compliance with the decisions of the Court. Such obligations are to be interpreted and enforced in a manner such that the protected guarantee is actually practical and effective, considering the special nature of human rights treaties. 5 A. Obligation to pay the amounts established as compensation for pecuniary damages, non-pecuniary damages, and the reimbursement of costs and expenses (Operative paragraph seven of the Judgment) 7. The State reported that by way of Decree No. 1249/2009 of September 14, 2009, the payment ordered by the Court for compensation was provided. This Decree established that to the amount of the compensation, “the interest on arrears should be added for the time that has passed since the date set in the Judgment (May 11, 2008) and the date of cancelation.” Specifically, the State noted: a) with regard to Mr. Juan Francisco Bueno Alves, that on September 30, 2009, the payment order was made for SIDIF No. 215293 regarding pecuniary damage, non-pecuniary damage, and costs and expenses. On the same date, the General Treasury of the Nation made the transfer, in the HSBC Bank, “for the amount equivalent […] to U[S]$ 353,000 [three hundred and fifty-three thousand dollars of the United States of America], that is, the amount of $ 1,356,579.00 [one million, three hundred and fifty-six thousand, five hundred and seventy-nine Argentine pesos].” Moreover, in regard to the interest on arrears due to Mr. Bueno Alves, it noted that on November 18, 2009, the payment order was made for SIDIF No. 255612 for the amount of $355,355.87 (three hundred and fifty-five thousand, three hundred and fifty-five Argentine pesos and eighty-seven cents), which was transferred on November 26, 2009. It explained that for calculating the interest on arrears, it used “the nominal annual lending rate (loans) with a thirty day expiration of the National Bank of Argentina,” according to that determined by the Sub-secretary of the Financial Services and General Office of Legal Matters of the Ministry of Economics and Public Finance, and calculated the time elapsed from May 11, 2008, until September 30, 2009. b) with regard to Inés Maria del Carmen Afonso Fernandez and Verónica Inés Bueno, that on November 18, 2009, the payment orders were made for SIDF No. 255617 and SIDF No. 255618, for each, for the amount of $38,140.00 (thirty-eight thousand, one hundred and forty Argentine pesos), equivalent to US$10,000.00 (ten thousand dollars of the United States of America). These amounts were transferred to both victims on December 7, 2009. As for the interest on arrears, each of the victims was paid $11,330.76 (eleven thousand, three hundred and thirty Argentine 5 Cf. Case of Ivcher-Bronstein v. Peru. Competence. Judgment of September 24, 1999. Series C No. 54, para. 37; Case of Radilla Pacheco V. Mexico, supra note 2, Considering sixth, and Case of Acevedo Buendía et al. (“Discharged and Retired Employees of the Office of the Comptroller”) v. Peru, supra note 2, Considering sixth. 3