33 103. Moreover, in all the cases before the Court, the Inter-American Commission and the victims or their legal representatives have accepted its monitoring function, have forwarded their comments on the reports submitted by the States to the Court, and have abided by the decisions of the Court regarding compliance with judgment. Thus, the activity of the Court and the conduct of both the States, and the InterAmerican Commission and the victims or their legal representatives, have been complementary in relation to monitoring compliance with judgments, so that the Court has exercised the function of carrying out this monitoring and, in turn, the States, the Inter-American Commission and the victims or their legal representatives have respected the decisions issued by the Court in the exercise of this supervisory function. 104. Contrary to what Panama has affirmed (supra para. 54(e)), as regards the lapse of time required in order to consider that constant practice exists, this Court considers that the important point is that the practice is observed without interruption and constantly, and that it is not essential that the conduct should be practiced over a specific period of time. This is how it has been understood by International case law has even international legal writings and case law.73 recognized the existence of customary norms that were developed over very short periods.74 E) PROCEDURE APPLIED TO MONITORING COMPLIANCE WITH THE DECISIONS OF THE COURT 105. Neither the American Convention, nor the Statute and Rules of Procedure of the Court indicate a procedure that should be observed for monitoring compliance with the judgments delivered by the Court, or with regard to other matters, such as urgent and provisional measures. The Court has carried out this monitoring using a written procedure, which consists in the responsible State presenting the reports that the Court requests, and the Inter-American Commission and the victims or their legal representatives forwarding comments on these reports. Likewise, with regard to the stage of monitoring compliance with judgments, the Court has adopted the constant practice of issuing orders or sending communications to the responsible State in order, inter alia, to express its concern in relation to aspects of the The “Street Children” case (Villagrán Morales et al.). Compliance with judgment. Order of the InterAmerican Court of Human Rights of November 27, 2003; Loayza Tamayo case. Compliance with judgment. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of November 27, 2003; Cantoral Benavides case. Compliance with judgment. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of November 27, 2003; Bámaca Velásquez case. Compliance with judgment. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of November 27, 2003; The “White Van” case (Paniagua Morales et al.). Compliance with judgment. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of November 27, 2003; Castillo Páez case. Compliance with judgment. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of November 27, 2003; The Constitutional Court case. Compliance with judgment. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of November 27, 2003; Hilaire, Constantine and Benjamin et al. case. Compliance with judgment. Order of the InterAmerican Court of Human Rights of November 27, 2003; Barrios Altos case. Compliance with judgment. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of November 28, 2003; and “The Last Temptation of Christ” case (Olmedo Bustos et al.). Compliance with judgment. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of November 28, 2003. 73 Cf. North Sea Continental Shelf, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1969, paras. 73 and 74; and Free City of Danzig and International Labour Organization, Advisory Opinion, 1930, P.C.I.J., Collection of Advisory Opinions, Series B.-No. 18, pp. 12-13. 74 Cf. Free City of Danzig and International Labour Organization, Advisory Opinion, 1930, P.C.I.J., Collection of Advisory Opinions, Series B.-No. 18, pp. 12-13.