28 adopted norms56 that clearly establish the procedure that this body should use for monitoring compliance with the judgments of the European Court. Unlike the procedure in the inter-American protection system, the Committee of Ministers is the political body to which the responsible States submit their reports on the measures adopted to execute judgments. 88. The American Convention does not establish a specific body responsible for monitoring compliance with the judgments delivered by the Court, as provided for in the European Convention. When the American Convention was drafted, the model adopted by the European Convention was followed as regards competent bodies and institutional mechanisms; however, it is clear that, when regulating monitoring compliance with the judgments of the Inter-American Court, it was not envisaged that the OAS General Assembly or the OAS Permanent Council would carry out a similar function to the Committee of Ministers in the European system. 89. The travaux préparatoires to the American Convention allow us to consult the wishes of the States, as regards monitoring compliance with the judgments of the Court, when they adopted this treaty. The draft convention57 does not establish a provision similar to the actual Article 65. However, the Second Commission, responsible for studying and drafting the articles corresponding to the procedural part of the draft convention,58 proposed the text of the actual Article 65 of the American Convention. In the Report on “Organs of Protection and General Provisions” of November 21, 1969, at the Inter-American Specialized Conference on Human Rights59, the Second Commission indicated in its fifth session, held on November 17, 1969, that: The delegations expressed their opinion that the Court should be granted a broad competence that would enable it to be an effective instrument for the jurisdictional protection of human rights.60 In this report, when explaining the wording of the provisions of the draft treaty corresponding to the Court, the Second Commission referred to the then draft of the actual Article 65 as follows: Article 65, which is a new provision, establishes that the Court shall submit a report to the General Assembly of the Organization, which is contemplated in Article 52 of the Charter of the Organization, reformed by the Protocol of Buenos Aires. 56 Cf. Council of Europe, Rules adopted by the Committee of Ministers for the Application of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the European Convention on Human Rights, approved on 10 January 2001 at the 736th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies. 57 Draft Inter-American Convention on the Protection of Human Rights prepared by the InterAmerican Commission on Human Rights and adopted as a “working document” by the Inter-American Specialized Conference on Human Rights, by a Resolution of the Council of the Organization of American States in the session held on October 2, 1968. Cf. OEA/Ser. K/XVI/1.2, Inter-American Specialized Conference on Human Rights, Proceedings and Documents, OEA Doc. 5, September 22, 1969, pp. 12-35. 58 At the first plenary session of the Inter-American Specialized Conference on Human Rights, held on November 8, 1969, it was decided to create the Second Commission. 59 The American Convention on Human Rights was adopted at the Inter-American Specialized Conference on Human Rights, held in San José, Costa Rica, from 7 to 22 November, de 1969. 60 OEA/Ser. K/XVI/1.1, Doc. 71, November 21, 1969, p. 5.