19 emphasized the need for the State to: demonstrate the actions it has taken following the Judgment to improve the protection programs; prove that these actions have effectively improved the protection of legal officials, victims and witnesses; and, make a proposal regarding the impact indicators that would be used to assess the effectiveness of the protection programs. Then, in the observations of January 4, 2010, they further alleged that the State should “inform the representatives’’ about the bill that seeks to create a Coordinating Committee of the National System of Protection and report, in a timely fashion, on the progress made in the legislative process.” Finally, the representatives sustained that “in this case, the inefficiency of the protection mechanisms is evident, in which, despite the existence of provisional measures in favor of some next-of-kin, [they] suffered new attacks" between January and April 2010. They requested the Court to continue monitoring compliance with this measure. 69. The Commission manifested that it "value[d] the information presented by the State," but that "in light of the observations presented by the representatives, it consider[ed] it [was] necessary to learn about the progress made in relation to the proposal.” Then, it indicated that “it t[ook] note of the bill submitted to Congress; [however], it does not have sufficient information regarding the impact of the Judgment of the Court on the proceedings to avoid the recurrence of the events and guarantee that the judicial employees have a system of adequate security and protection.” 70. The Court values that the State has adopted measures to evaluate the operation of its protection system and that it is reforming the protection programs in general, taking into account the reparation measure ordered by the Tribunal in this case. The Court requests the State to present updated information on the progress made in said reform and its impact on guaranteeing a system of adequate security and protection and that, while doing so, make reference to the observations presented by the representatives. * * * Medical and psychological treatment 71. With regard to the duty to immediately provide, without cost, the medical and psychological treatment needed by the next of kin of the deceased victims, surviving victim Arturo Salgado Garzón and his next of kin (operative paragraph eleven of the Judgment). The Court received information from the State, the representatives and the Inter-American Commission, by means of briefs and as part of the private hearing on the procedure to monitor compliance held together with seven other cases regarding Colombia (supra Having Seen 13 to 15). 72. The Tribunal shall rule, in a timely fashion, on the compliance with this reparation measure in the instant case as well as the seven other Colombian cases, given that it is monitoring compliance with this measure for all eight cases together. To that end, the Tribunal shall take into account the information presented by means of briefs in said cases as well as the information forwarded at said hearing on monitoring compliance. * * * Training in human rights education within the Colombian armed forces