10 should they have a housing subsidy as part of the economic reparation”. Moreover, even though the State indicated that it was not a requirement for the beneficiaries of this measure to be registered in the Oficina Presidencial para la Acción Social to have access to these legal benefits, said entity stated on June 18, 2008 “that the people who were not included in the registry [of displaced population] shall have to render a displacement statement as a mere formality and [in 15 days] they would be registered […] in the municipality of Valdivia, [which] never happened”. The representatives further indicated that on “February 16, 2009 and considering the non-compliance with all the commitments undertaken in this regard, [...] they requested a meeting of compliance with Acción Social, Fonvivienda and the Environment, Housing and Territorial Development Ministry, entities that, according to the domestic legislation, are bound to assist the displaced population”; but such meeting has not been convened up to this date. Likewise, “a specific proposal was sent [to conduct] the corresponding registration of all the people that form part of Appendice IV of the Judgment of the Court in the registry of displaced population” and to “require Fonvivienda to issue a special Order in order to grant the housing subsidies to the family groups that form part of such appendice”. The representatives have received no answer in that regard. 29. That the Commission noted that the problem of displacement “maintains the victims in a condition of extreme vulnerability” and that “the safety is a necessary element for [their] return”. Furthermore, it expressed that “should there be no safety conditions for their return - or until they exist - the Court determined the possibility for the victims to be relocated in the place they so wish”. Finally, it pointed out that “the organization of the Municipal Committee, at the earliest possible date, is essential”. 30. That in this respect, the Tribunal notes that this measure of reparation comprises two obligations: the obligation to guarantee the security of those surviving victims that decide to return to the municipality of Ituango. If it is not possible to create such security conditions, to be able to count on the necessary and sufficient resources to ensure that the victims of forced displacement mentioned in Appendice IV of the Judgment may resettle in similar conditions to those they had before these events, in a place they freely and voluntarily choose.18 31. That even though the State and the representatives expressed dissenting opinions as to the current situation of security in the municipality of Ituango, they both pointed out that the victims of forced displacement do not wish to return to municipal districts (corregimientos). Therefore, both parties are of the idea that, in compliance with the Judgment, the State provides said victims with socioeconomic support and access to housing subsidies. Moreover, according to the last piece of information forwarded in this regard, the representatives are waiting for the establishment of the Municipal Committee of Ituango and the Departamental Committee of Antioquia in order to provide the assistance so required to the displaced population and they are also looking forward to have a meeting with the state entities in charge of helping the displaced population in order to evaluate the proposal to grant such housing subsidies to the people indicated in Appendice IV of the Judgment. In this regard, considering the fact that the State as well as the representatives have requested permission from the Tribunal to comply with this measure of reparation by means of socioeconomic aid and access to housing subsidies, the Court deems it is convenient to allow it, as long as the beneficiaries of the reparation ordered have agreed on that proposal. 18 Cf. Case of the Ituango Massacres, supra note 7, para. 404.