15 1. To declare admissible the request for interpretation of the judgment on preliminary objections, merits, reparations, and costs in the case of Osorio Rivera and family members v. Peru, submitted by the State, pursuant to the terms of paragraph 9 of this interpretation judgment. 2. To declare admissible the request for interpretation related to the reparation ordered by the Court to reform the criminal definition of the crime of enforced disappearance and, consequently, to clarify, through interpretation, on the basis of paragraphs 211, 212 and 271 and the twelfth operative paragraph of the judgment on preliminary objections, merits, reparations, and costs issued on November 26, 2013, the meaning and scope of the State’s obligation to adopt the necessary measures to reform, within a reasonable time, its criminal legislation in order to make its definition of enforced disappearance of persons compatible with international parameters, according to the terms of paragraphs 23 to 26 of this judgment of interpretation. 3. To dismiss as inadmissible the three remaining issues of the request for interpretation submitted by the State regarding the judgment on preliminary objections, merits, reparations, and costs issued on November 26, 2013, related to the Court’s considerations on the amnesty laws, the training programs for the Armed Forces, y the amounts for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages, for the reasons indicated in paragraphs 32 to 36, 40 to 42 and 46 to 47 of this interpretation judgment. 4. To order that the Secretariat of the Court notify this interpretation judgment to the State of Peru, the representatives of the victims, and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights of this judgment of interpretation. Done in Spanish in San José, Costa Rica, on November 20, 2014.