17 commitment to carrying out serious investigations that bring the facts of the case to light and lead to the sanction of all those responsible. 33. Finally, the Tribunal notes that according to its Judgment, “upon the [C]ommunity members’ return to Moiwana Village, the State shall send representatives every month to Moiwana Village during the first year in order to consult with the Moiwana residents. If […] [C]ommunity members express concern regarding their safety during those monthly meetings, the State must take appropriate measures to guarantee their security[. These] shall be designed in strict consultation” with the members of the Community.34 e) Duty to establish a community development fund for health, housing, and educational programs (Operative Paragraph five of the Judgment) 34. The State reported that because the Moiwana Community is still in French Guiana, an independent consultant was hired in order to inquire as to whether the members of the Community were willing to return, the type of houses they preferred, and where they wanted the houses to be located. According to the State, Community members responded that they wanted the houses to be located at the original site, so construction begun there. However, it was halted for new consultations with a neighboring indigenous community. Additionally, the State decided, in consultation with the Moiwana Community, not to undertake the construction of a school or medical center, given that the Community had identified the construction of housing as its top priority. The State indicated that it had earmarked US$ 1,200,000.00 (one million two hundred thousand dollars of the United States of America) for this purpose and submitted a schedule showing that this amount was to be paid in five installments over the years 2006 to 2010. According to the State, “the two last transfer[s] of funds were sen[t] […] on October 5, 2010,” and the “final transfer to the [f]und is still pending.” The State is willing to transfer this amount over the course of this year. Furthermore, five houses have already been built, two more are almost complete, and the foundations of five more have been laid. However, the State indicated that not all of the Community members will have houses, and many victims will not be able to return because their children are attending school in French Guiana. Finally, the State indicated that the execution of the SSDI project (supra Considering Clause 19) is “in a final phase.” 35. The representatives indicated that the State still has not transferred the “full amount of funds to the development committee.” They also stated that “[u]ntil the territory from which the Moiwana [C]ommunity was expelled has been delimited, demarcated[,] and titled, the development committee cannot begin to implement the activities of the development fund, which includes building houses and providing services for those victims who decide to return. Houses, a school[,] and [a] health centre cannot be constructed until such time as the precise location of the lands in question is ascertained and agreed upon, and is legally recognised and secured.” According to the representatives, the construction of houses next to the indigenous 34 Case of the Moiwana Community v. Suriname, supra note 8, para. 212.