-34. The note dated May 2nd, 2007, in which the Secretariat, following instructions from the President, reiterated that the State shall submit, as soon as possible, its report on the measures taken in compliance with the Judgment. Furthermore, the Secretariat pointed out that if said information was not submitted within this term, the Court will determine the eventual applicability of Article 65 of the American Convention. Said report has not been received. 5. The note dated August 28, 2007 in which the Secretariat, following instructions from the President of the Court, ordered the State to submit its report on the measures taken in compliance with the Judgment no later than October 15, 2007. Moreover, the Secretariat ordered the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Commission” or “the Inter-American Commission”) and the representatives of Winston Caesar (hereinafter “the representatives”) to submit, within the same term, any relevant information so that it be available to the Court in its following Ordinary Period of Sessions. The report requested has not been submitted within the term granted. 6. The brief dated October 16, 2007, received the next day at the Secretariat, in which the Commission referred to the “non-compliance by the [...] State with the orders of the Court contained in [the] Judgment”. In this regard, the Commission pointed out, inter alia, that: a) in the absence of information provided by the State and of any other information indicating that the State would have adopted the measures to comply with said Judgment, the Commission can only observe that the State’s duty to comply with the orders of the Court remains pending; b) with respect to the obligation to adopt such legislative or other measures as may be necessary to abrogate the Corporal Punishment Act (Offenders Over Eighteen) and to amend Section 6 of Trinidad and Tobago’s Constitution, the Commission has not received any information that might indicate that said abrogation or amendment have taken place. On the contrary, the Commission has received information that the courts in Trinidad and Tobago have continued to apply corporal punishment, notwithstanding said Judgment by the Court; and c) the Commission requested the Court to continue to monitor compliance with said Judgment until “the State has fully implemented all of its provisions.” 7. The note dated October 24, 2007, in which the Secretariat, following instructions from the President of the Court, requested the representatives and the State to submit, no later than November 9, 2007, all relevant information on this matter. No information has been submitted within the established term. WHEREAS: 1. It is an inherent power of the judicial functions of the Court to monitor compliance with its decisions. 2. Trinidad and Tobago has been a State Party to the American Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Convention” or “the American Convention”) from May 28, 1991, date on which it also recognized the jurisdiction of the Court pursuant to Article 62 of the Convention, until May 26, 1999, date on which the denunciation made by the State entered into force, pursuant to Article 78 thereof.