8 Official mechanism to monitor compliance with the Judgment (operative paragraph nine of the Judgment) 14. That as to the obligation to establish, within six months of notification of this Judgment, an official mechanism to perform the functions set forth in paragraph 311 of the Judgment, the State mentioned that, by means of a Record of the Permanent Inter-Sectorial Commission on Human Rights of February 28, 2006, it was established an official mechanism to monitor compliance with the reparations, called "M.O.S. Mapiripán" (hereinafter, “M.O.S. Mapiripán” or “M.O.S.”). This record was signed by the Vice-President of the Republic, the Minister of Interior and Justice, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Minister of National Defense and Social Protection, the Minister of Treasury and Public Credit, the Director of the Presidential Program on Human Rights, the members of said Inter-Sectorial Commission, the President of the Superior Council of Judicature, the Attorney General and the Senior Presidential Advisor to Social Action and International Cooperation. The record defines the roles and the different State’s entities that would participate in the mechanism. Furthermore, the State, in due time, requested the representatives and the Commission to appoint two persons to act as representatives of the victims in said mechanism, according to what was established in the Judgment. On September 11, 2006 a meeting was held between the State’s entities that would participate in the M.O.S. and the representatives of the next-of-kin of the identified victims, which marked the official operation of the M.O.S. Mapiripán. The State emphasized that the procedure to monitor compliance with the measures of reparations ordered in the Judgment is being done, as the Tribunal decided, by means of the M.O.S. Mapiripán, in which certain rules for its operation were agreed upon: monthly meetings; required quorum; composition of the Technical Secretary; appointment of representatives and prior consultation of the agenda. 15. That, moreover, during the hearing the State mentioned that since its establishment, within the framework of the M.O.S., 24 meetings have been held, complying in this way with the duties imposed by the Judgment. It also indicated that the mechanism is an inter-institutional program, organized by the State but one in which the participation of the victims and their next-of-kin have been primary. It pointed out the following achievements: periodic assessment of compliance with the judgment; arrangement of the text, date and means to convene the next-of-kin; processing of a sheet to collect information. It also informed that, notwithstanding the effective term established in the Judgment, as a consequence of a meeting held with the representatives, it was agreed that the operation of the M.O.S. would extend until December 2009 and that, at that moment, the need to continue with it and also, if applicable, its operative rules, would be evaluated. In this sense, the State requested the Court to declare the compliance with this obligation and to positively value that the operation of this mechanism has been extended, by mutual agreement with the parties, until December 2009 in order to monitor the other measures of reparation ordered by the Court. 16. The representatives asserted that such mechanism has been established and that it is working and that, in addition, the representatives of the victims were invited to participate in it. Furthermore, they mentioned that several meetings were held and that some activities were carried out within the framework of the M.O.S. tending to comply with the reparations ordered in the Judgment. During the hearing, the representatives confirmed the information presented by the State and claimed that the M.O.S. has been a useful mechanism, which, though with some limitations, have made important progress. Moreover, they welcomed the willingness of the State to follow orders and invited the Court to assess the significant progress and