7 16. Thus the State must immediately take any necessary actions to locate and deliver the mortal remains of Mr. Santiago Gómez Palomino to his next-of-kin. So that the Court can determine the due diligence with respect to compliance with the present reparation measure, the State must present detailed, comprehensive, and updated information through the submission of copies of documents relating to: a) the actions and steps taken to locate and deliver Mr. Gómez Palomino’s remains to his family, and b) the investigations and steps taken regarding the statements and other information on the whereabouts of Mr. Gómez Palomino’s remains provided by those individuals receiving benefits for effective cooperation. c) Regarding the obligation to publish the relevant parts of the Judgment, at least once, in a nationally circulated newspaper (Operative Paragraph 9 of the Judgment) 17. During the private hearing, the State reported that it had complied with its obligation to publish the Judgment “in a national newspaper,” and it presented a copy of the publication, which appeared in newspaper titled “La Primera” on February 16, 2011 (supra Having Seen 9). The State also declared that it intended to comply with its obligation to publish the Judgments of the Court in “El Peruano,” the Official Gazette of Peru, through its website for a one month, and also publish it in the “Peruvian System of Legal Information,” where “all Judgments issued by the [...] Court” may be found. 18. Regarding the publication referred to by the State, the representatives and the Commission both concluded that this reparation measure has been completely fulfilled with. However, they noted that compliance was achieved “almost five years after the time period set by the Court expired.” 19. The Court notes that the State has provided documentation showing that the publication was made in “La Primera,” a national newspaper, on February 16, 2011. In this respect, the Court deems that the State’s publication satisfies the Court’s order; therefore, it declares that the State has fully complied with this reparation measure. 20. Consequently, it is not necessary in the purview of the present proceedings to opine on the aforementioned possibility expressed by the State of publishing the Judgments of the Court on the website of the Official Gazette, “El Peruano,” for one month because this measure has already been declared to be fulfilled, in accordance with Declarative Paragraph 1 of the Order of July 1, 2009 (supra Having Seen 3). d) Regarding the obligation to provide medical and psychological treatment, free of charge and through its specialized health institutions, to Victoria Margarita Palomino Buitrón, Esmila Liliana Conislla Cárdenas, María Dolores Gómez Palomino, Luzmila Sotelo Palomino, Emiliano Palomino Buitrón, Mónica Palomino Buitrón, Rosa Palomino Buitrón, Margarita Palomino Buitrón, and the minor Ana María Gómez Guevara (Operative Paragraph 10 of the Judgment) 21. The State declared that when the Court issued this reparation measure in 2005, Peru lacked the public health services system that it has today. Thus, it reported that the beneficiaries of this reparation measure “have been enrolled in a Servicio Integral de Salud [Comprehensive Healthcare Service] for several years” (hereinafter “SIS”) and “have received attention when needed.” Regarding this healthcare service, the State indicated “that it covers the majority of illnesses [and], like all insurance, does not cover 100% of expenses because some illnesses are excluded.” The State also remarked that it currently