3 6. That the States Parties to the Convention that have accepted the Court’s compulsory jurisdiction must comply with the obligations established by the Court. This responsibility includes the State’s obligation to inform the Court of the measures adopted to comply with the decisions of the Court in its judgment. The prompt implementation of the State’s obligation to report to the Court on how each aspect ordered by the Court is being fulfilled is essential to assess the overall status of compliance with the judgment. 7. That the Court observes that, at various times during this procedure of monitoring compliance, the State expressed its intention of complying with the Judgment and forwarded information on the measures taken, inter alia: (a) the promulgation of Act No. 445 entitled “Act concerning the Communal Property Regime of the Indigenous Peoples and Ethnic Communities of the Autonomous Regions of the Atlantic Coast and of the Coco, Bocay, Indio and Maiz Rivers” (hereinafter “Act No. 445”), and indicated that it had promoted the implementation of this act both financially and operationally; (b) the submission of the case of the members of the Mayagna (Sumo) Awas Tingni Community (hereinafter “the Awas Tingni Community” or “the Community”) for the delimitation, demarcation and titling of their lands, under the provisions of Act No. 445, the measures taken, and the status of the procedure; (c) the official handing over of the students hostel to the members of the Awas Tingni Community on March 5, 2003.3 According to the State, on March 3, 2004, it agreed to pay interest on arrears for the delay in the delivery of the hostel; and (d) the payment of the expenses and costs made on March 5, 2002, with cheque No. 3685. 8. That the Inter-American Commission acknowledged that the State had complied with the third, sixth and seventh operative paragraphs of the judgment. However, it emphasized the failure to comply with the fourth operative paragraph of the judgment relating to the delimitation, demarcation and titling of the lands of the members of the Awas Tingni Community more than six years after the judgment had been delivered, on August 31, 2001. It also pointed to the absence of specific information on various aspects of compliance with the measures ordered in the judgment and about the specific actions taken and progress made in the procedure under Act No. 445 to comply with the Court’s judgment. 9. That, on several occasions the representatives have presented observations on the information provided by the State and have referred to the status of compliance with the different measures of reparation, including: (a) that they have stated repeatedly that, despite the time limits established in Act No. 445 and the State’s commitment to give priority to the delimitation, demarcation and titling of the lands of the Community, the application has suffered several delays and is at a standstill. Consequently, they stated that the Act did not represent an effective mechanism for the delimitation, demarcation and titling of the communal lands; (b) that the demarcation request presented by the members of the Community under the Act No. 445 procedure, had still not led to compliance with the fourth operative paragraph of the judgment and more than four years had elapsed since the request was presented; (c) that the Bilwi Community student hostel had been built and officially handed over to the members of the Community on March 5, 2003. However, once the building had been handed over, the State had not officially notified the Community of its final cost The official record of the final delivery, submitted as evidence by the State, states that, on February 28, 2003, the Emergency Social Investment Fund (FISE) received the student hostel for the Community from the contractor. 3