8 8. Upon analyzing the information supplied by the State, the representatives of the next of kin, and the Inter-American Commission, the Court considers it imperative that the State reports to the Court regarding the following points pending compliance: a) Follow-up on action taken to investigate the facts of the instant case in relation to violations of rights enshrined in the American Convention, to the detriment of Ernesto Rafael Castillo Páez, and to identify and punish those responsible for them, both abettors and perpetrators of the crime against Mr. Castillo Páez, since it does not follow from the information supplied that, thus far, this obligation has been fulfilled in accordance with the rulings of this Court (point two of the November 27, 1998 Judgment on reparations); and b) Follow-up on the legal measures taken to return the mortal remains of Ernesto Rafael Castillo Páez to his next of kin. 9. Providing sufficient information on compliance with the Judgment is a duty of the State, repeatedly stated by this Court.4 10. In relation to the point already fulfilled by the State (supra considering seven) this Court will not require again any information whatsoever. 11. In relation to the points still not complied with by the State (supra considering eight), the State must comply with them as soon as possible. The Court will consider the general status of compliance with Judgments on the merits it has delivered (November 3, 1997) and its Judgments on reparations (November 27, 1998), once it receives the aforementioned report of the State together with the observations from the representatives of the victim’s next of kin and of the InterAmerican Commission. NOW THEREFORE: THE INTER-AMERICAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS, By virtue of its powers to monitor compliance with its rulings and pursuant to Articles 67 and 68 (1) of the American Convention on Human Rights, Article 25 (1) of the Statute of the Court and Article 29 (2) of its Rules of Procedure, DECLARES: 4 Cf. Neira Alegría et al Case. Compliance with Judgment. Order of the Court of November 28, 2002, considering nine; El Amparo Case. Compliance with Judgment. Order of the Court of November 28, 2002, considering eight; Loayza Tamayo Case. Compliance with Judgment. Order of the Court of November 27, 2002, considering eight; Castillo Páez Case. Compliance with Judgment. Order of the Court of November 27, 2002, considering nine; Garrido and Baigorria Case. Compliance with Judgment. Order of the Court of November 27, 2002, considering eight; Blake Case. Compliance with Judgment. Order of the Court of November 27, 2002, considering nine; Caballero Delgado and Santana Case. Compliance with Judgment. Order of the Court of November 27, 2002, considering six and seven; and Baena Ricardo et al Case. Compliance with Judgment. Order of the Court of June 21, 2002, considering two; Baena Ricardo et al Case. Compliance with Judgment Order of the Court of June 6, 2003, considering ten and twelve; and “The Last Temptation of Christ” Case (Olmedo Bustos et al..) Compliance with Judgment Order of the Court of November 28, 2003, considering ten.