2 the Section of [the] Judgment on Proven Facts, without the respective footnotes, paragraphs 101 to 123 of the Section on International Responsibility of the State, as well as its operative part, in accordance with the terms of paragraph 318 of [the] Judgment. 15. The State must pay the amounts set forth in paragraphs 274 and 278 of […] instant Judgment, in favor of the next of kin of the victims, for pecuniary damages, in accordance with the terms of its paragraphs 257, 259, 260, 311, 326, 327, 329 to 333. 16. The State must pay the amounts set forth in paragraphs 288 and 290 of the […] Judgment, in favor of the next of kin of the victims, for non-pecuniary damages, in accordance with the terms of its paragraphs 257, 259, 260, 289, 311, 326, 327, 329 to 333. 17. The State must pay the amounts set forth in paragraph 325 of the […] Judgment, for costs and expenses, in accordance with the terms of its paragraphs 326 and 328 to 333. 18. The Court will oversee comprehensive compliance with [the] Judgment and it will close the instant case once the State has fully complied with its provisions. Within one year of notification of [the] Judgment, the State must report to the Court on steps taken to comply with it, in accordance with the terms of its paragraph 334. 2. The brief of May 8, 2006 by means of which the State of Colombia (hereinafter, the “State” or “Colombia”) informed on proceedings conducted in order to establish an official mechanism to oversee the reparations ordered in the Judgment and the publication of the pertinent parts thereof in the Official Gazette and in another newspaper with national circulation. 3. The note of November 17, 2006 by means of which the Secretariat of the Court (hereinafter, the "Secretariat") reminded the State that the time limit to present its first report on the compliance with the Judgment, as required in operative paragraph eighteen of the Judgment, expired on October 10, 2006. In view of that, the Secretariat requested the State to present said report as soon as practicable, in order for the Court to learn about the status of compliance with said Judgment. 4. The brief of February 5, 2007 forwarded by Jaime Arturo Morales Martínez, who declared having conducted the “judicial proceedings of the case in order to pay the next-of-kin [of Messr. Eliécer Martínez Vaca], but up to [that] date the payment has not been made"; as well as the Secretariat's note of February 14, 2007 by means of which it was informed that, in accordance with the terms of paragraphs 257, 258 and 311 and operative paragraph nine of the Judgment, the victims' nextof-kin could resort to the official mechanism to oversee compliance with the reparations ordered in said Judgment, and to that end, they could consult the State's Agent of the instant case. 5. The brief of April 11, 2007 by which the State referred, inter alia, to "the situation of [Messrs. Omar Patiño Vaca and Eliécer Martínez Vaca,] who were declared victims in the Judgment [...] regarding whom, after information obtained, it was determined that they did not die between the days of July 15 and 20, 1997 in Mapiripán". 6. The briefs of the representatives of the victims’ next-of-kin (hereinafter, the “representatives”) and of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter, the “Commission” or the “Inter-American Commission”) of May 3, 2007 by means of which they presented comments to the State’s brief of April 11, 2007 (supra Having Seen clause 5). 7. The briefs of November 24, 2006 and July 15, 2008 by means of which the State presented its first and second report, respectively, in relation to the compliance with the Judgment. 8. The Secretariat’s note of August 28, 2007 and September 9, 2008 by means of which, following the instructions of the then President, it was noted that the time