3 guarantee is truly practical and effective, bearing in mind the special nature of human rights treaties.4 6. By means of the brief of March 17, 2011 (supra Having Seen 6), the Director of Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and a representative of the Interdisciplinary Group for Human Rights, in unison and “with the aim of moving forward with the compliance of the [...] reparation measure,” requested that the Court “approve the agreement reached between the parties” regarding Ms. Nelly Valle Jaramillo in relation to Operative Paragraph 19 of the Judgment (supra Having Seen 1), in the following terms: […] the grant that must be given to Ms. Nelly Valle Jaramillo be provided to her son, Luis Fernando Montoya, who is presently enrolled in a master’s degree program in economic law at the Universidad Externado of Colombia in the city of Bogotá. To this end, the parties ag[ree] that the costs of tuition and living costs will be covered, which in total amount to forty-three million Colombian pesos ($43,000,000.00) The grant shall be paid in two payments, in the following manner: the first payment of twenty-one million, five-hundred thousand Colombian pesos ($21,500,000.00) shall be made within three months following the date the Court gives notice of the approval of the agreement, and upon presentation of receipts showing payment of the first year of the master’s program. The second payment of twenty-one million, five hundred thousand Colombian pesos ($21,500,000.00) shall be made within a month, upon proof of payment of the final year of the master’s program. There will not be any additional requirements for payment of the agreed upon amount. Expenses for tuition and living costs will be deposited into the student’s bank account. 7. Firstly, the Tribunal notes that in Operative Paragraph 19 of the Judgment (supra Having Seen 1), it ordered the State to “provide Nelly Valle Jaramillo and Carlos Fernando Jaramillo Correa [...] with a grant to study or learn a trade.” In this regard, in the Interpretation of the Judgment, the Court considered, with regard to the representatives’ query as to whether the grants for Carlos Fernando Jaramillo Correa and Nelly Valle Jaramillo could be transferred to their children, that “Operative Paragraph 19 clearly orders that the grant be given to Mr. Jaramillo Correa and Ms. Valle Jaramillo.”5However, based on a query made by the State as to whether it would be possible to provide the beneficiaries with a financial subsidy in order to comply with this measure, the Court observed that paragraph 227 of the Judgment (supra Having Seen 1) indicates that the State committed to undertake this reparation measure “after consulting with the victims.” Therefore, the Court deemed that the issues raised in the State’s query should be dealt with by the State directly and, when appropriate, by the Tribunal as part of the process of monitoring compliance with the Judgment.6 8. By virtue of the foregoing, the Court will analyze the agreement presented by the parties only insofar as it refers to Ms. Nelly Valle Jaramillo. However, the Court recalls that the reparation prescribed in Operative Paragraph 19 of the Judgment is also for the benefit of Carlos Fernando Jaramillo Correa. In this regard, the Court notes with emphasis the willingness and readiness to enter into dialogue and reach an agreement 4 Cf. Case of Ivcher Bronstein v. Peru. Competence. Judgement of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of September 24, 1999. Series C No. 54, para. 37; Case of Tibi v. Ecuador, supra note 1, Considering Clause 5, and Case of Valle Jaramillo v. Colombia, supra note 1, Considering Clause 5. 5 Cf. Case of Valle Jaramillo et el. v. Colombia. Interpretation of Judgment on Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgement of July 7, 2009, Series C. No. 201, para. 40. 6 Cf. Case of Valle Jaramillo et el. v. Colombia, supra note 5, para. 37.