99 of the alleged victims’ next of kin have also been recognized as victims and included as beneficiaries of the PIR; in other cases, their registration is still under review by the CR. According to Peru, the following amounts were paid to the next of kin who benefited from financial reparations under the PIR: to Zósimo Hilario Quispe the sum of S/. 5,000 new soles; to Zenón Cirilo Osnayo Tunque the sum of S/. 10,000 new soles, and to Abilio Hilario Quispe the sum of S/. 10,000 new soles; in the latter case this sum of money is reportedly available in a bank account in his name. 332. On the other hand, the State argued that the judgment of the National Criminal Chamber of February 9, 2012, in addition to convicting those declared individually criminally responsible for the events that took place in the community of Santa Bárbara, determined the payment of S/. 25,000 new soles as civil reparations in favor of each of the legal heirs of the injured parties, jointly and severally with those responsible for the crime, “without prejudice to the right of the relatives of the injured parties to request compensation against the civilly responsible third party.” Subsequently, in a ruling of December 16, 2013, the Second National Criminal Court ordered the convicted party Oscar Carrera Gonzáles to pay compensation; thus, to date, the latter has made eleven deposits totaling the sum of S/. 555 new soles. Finally, the State requested that consideration be given to the fact that the representatives (lawyers of the civil party) had the possibility of taking the corresponding action at the domestic level to demand payment from the civilly liable third party, which did not occur. It also referred in detail to this point, as well as to the criminal and civil regulations applicable at the domestic level. Considerations of the Court 333. The evidence shows that at least on April 3, 2014, the following persons were registered in the Single Registry of Victims (RUV) of the Reparations Council as beneficiaries of the Comprehensive Reparations Plan (PIR): Dionicia Quispe Mallqui, Francisco Hilario Torres, Mercedes Carhuapoma de la Cruz and Antonia Hilario Quispe, as well as Zenón Cirilo Osnayo Tunque, Zósimo Hilario Quispe, Abilio Hilario Quispe, Víctor Carhuapoma de la Cruz, Viviano Hilario Mancha (deceased) and Alejandro Huamaní Robles (deceased). On the other hand, Marcelo Hilario Quispe, Ana Carhuapoma de la Cruz (deceased), Dolores Morán Paucar (deceased) and Justiniano Guillén Ccanto (deceased) had their registration pending in the RUV and were not beneficiaries of the Economic Reparations Program (PRE). Finally, Victoria Riveros Valencia (deceased) and Marino Huamaní Vergara did not have a file and were not beneficiaries of the PRE. For his part, Gregorio Hilario Quispe's registration in the RUV was suspended and his incorporation in the PRE was pending. Finally, Victoria Riveros Valencia (deceased) and Marino Huamaní Vergara had no record and were not PRE beneficiaries. In addition, the following persons had benefited from the Economic Reparations Program (PRE) of the PIR, as beneficiaries linked to the case of the Santa Bárbara peasant community: a) Zósimo Hilario Quispe, with the sum of S/. 5,000 as reparation for the death of his father Francisco Hilario Torres, pending the award of reparations for the death of his mother Dionicia Quispe Mallqui, and b) Zenón Cirilo Osnayo Tunque, with the sum of S/. 10,000 as reparation. With respect to Víctor Carhuapoma de la Cruz and Abilio Hilario Quispe, the award of their reparations was pending, owing to budgetary constraints and, under Law No. 29.979, from January 2013, priority was given to beneficiaries by the date of the damages caused. Therefore, the damage suffered by the beneficiaries in 1991 would be addressed in the next lists. 375 334. To summarize, from the information provided so far, the Court finds that only four of the 15 victims of forced disappearance and six out of 14 of their next of kin had been registered in the RUV and two of the latter had received an amount of compensation. Although the State has had an opportunity to provide domestic reparations for the violations declared in this judgment, the information provided does not show a definitive result to date. Furthermore, the State did not Cf. Certificates of Accreditation of the Reparations Council, Single Registry of Victims, of September 8, 2008 (evidence file, folios 3869 to 3875 and 3877), and Brief of the Executive Secretary of the High Level Multisectoral Commission in charge of the actions and State policies regarding peace, collective reparations and national reconciliation(evidence file, folios 4714 and 4715). 375