-7and that payment will cover arrearage interest computed “as from February 5, 2005.” 10. The amici or amicus curiae briefs of Atencio Damas-Vega; José Ruiz-Pérez; Benedicto Arauz-Flores; Errol Agüero-Chacón; Marco Tulio Mora-Padilla; José Armando Jiménez-Carranza; Carlos Alberto Céspedes-León; Fernando HerreraCarranza; Geovanny Leiva-Lara; Manuel Hernández-Quesada; Rafael Antonio RojasMadrigal; José Ruiz-Pérez; Juan Carlos Villalta-Jiménez; Marvin Soto-Sánchez; José Joaquín Bonilla-Madrigal; Benedicto Arauz-Flores; Geovanny Leiva-Lara; José Solano-Soto, Iván Ruiz-Chávez, Francisco Miralles-Lewis, Javier Palma-Salguero, Gerardo León-Redondo and Manuel Hernández-Quesada; Rafael Antonio RojasMadrigal; Luis Esteban Medina-Medina; Aylvin Roderik Suazo-Chávez; Carlos Alberto Céspedes-León; José Ruiz-Pérez; Rocío Hidalgo-Parra; and Juan Carlos GonzálezLavergne, Carlos Alberto Echeverría-Alfaro, Alejandra Echeverría-Alfaro, Juan José Echeverría-Brealey, Roberto Echeverría-Alfaro, José Luís Ocampo-Rojas, Adolfo García-Baudrit, Karen Rokbrand-Fernández, Rosa María Rojas-Gamboa, Roxana Villalobos-Chaves, Franklin Gutiérrez-Rodríguez, Oscar Mata-Muñoz, Carolina Arguedas-Mora, Ronald Odio-Rohrmoser, Ivette Hoffman-Depass, Edgar OdioRohrmoser, Fernando Alfaro-Chamberlan, Paola-Montealegre, Anabella RohrmoserZuñiga, Felipe Beeche-Pozuelo, Carlos Morales-Fallas, Juan A. Cadriz, José Alberto Pinto-Monturiol, Alberto Pinto-Gutiérrez, Francisco Quijano-Quirós, Mauricio PintoMonturiol, Marisela Meléndez-Miranda and Sopranio Padilla-Velásquez. CONSIDERING: 1. That monitoring compliance with its decisions is a power inherent in the judicial functions of the Court. 2. That Costa Rica has been a State Party to the American Convention since November 22, 1969, and that it accepted the binding jurisdiction of the Court on July 2, 1980. 3. That, pursuant to Article 68(1) of the American Convention, “[t]he States Parties to the Convention undertake to comply with the judgment of the Court in any case to which they are parties.” For such purpose, States are required to guarantee implementation of the Court’s rulings at the domestic level. 1 4. That, given the final and not-subject-to-appeal nature of the Court’s judgments as established in Article 67 of the American Convention, said judgments are to be promptly and fully complied with by the State. 5. That the obligation to comply with the judgments of the Court conforms to a basic principle of the law of the international responsibility of States, as supported by international case law, under which States are required to comply with their international treaty obligations in good faith (pacta sunt servanda) and, as previously held by the Court and provided for in Article 27 of the Vienna Convention on the Law Cf. Case of the Five Pensioners. Compliance with Judgment. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of July 4, 2006, Considering clause No. 3; Case of the Constitutional Court. Compliance with Judgment. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of February 7, 2006, Considering clause No. 3; and Case of 19 Tradesmen. Compliance with Judgment. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of February 2, 2006, Considering clause No. 3. 1