4 persons appear before the State within twenty-four months of the date the [...] Judgment is delivered and they supply authentic evidence, in accordance with domestic legislation, of their status as next of kin of one of the victims, pursuant to article 2(15) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court; 10. that the State must pay the Comité de Familiares de las Víctimas (COFAVIC) of the incidents that occurred during February-March 1989, pursuant to paragraphs 132 and 133 of the [...] Judgment, as reimbursement for legal costs and expenses incurred in proceedings under domestic jurisdiction and before the inter-American system, US$75,000.00 (seventy-five thousand United States dollars) and US$10,000.00 (ten thousand United States dollars) to cover expenses to be incurred in future proceedings pertaining to compliance with the [...] Judgment, and that it must pay the Center for Justice and International Law (CEJIL), pursuant to paragraph 132 of the [...] Judgment, as reimbursement for expenses and costs incurred in proceedings before the interAmerican system, US$1,000.00 (one thousand United States dollars); 11. that the payments ordered in the [...] Judgment will be exempt from any existing or future levy or tax; 12. that the State must comply with the measures of reparation ordered in this Judgment within twelve months of the date they are notified, except with respect to operative paragraph 9.c of the [...] Judgment; 13. that the State must report to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights every six months after notification of the [...] Judgment, on steps taken to comply with it; and 14. that it will oversee compliance with [the] Judgment and will declare the instant case closed once the State has fully complied with the provisions therein. 3. The March 21, 2003 note by the State of Venezuela (hereinafter “the State” or “Venezuela”) and its attachments, in which it submitted information on compliance with the judgment on reparations, specifically on the steps taken by the Public Prosecutor’s Office to fulfill its obligation to conduct an examination regarding the facts and to locate, identify, and exhume the mortal remains of the victims in the instant case. 4. The May 3, 2003 brief with comments by the next of kin of the victims (hereinafter “the representatives”), in which they stated that: a) “there have been no substantive changes in the legal situation of the cases pertaining to the Caracazo,” as they have been in the initial stage of the proceedings in the Venezuelan venue since 1989 and they remain in absolute impunity; b) the next of kin of the missing victims in this case took all kinds of steps, both domestically and internationally, to establish their whereabouts or to request delivery of the remains of those victims whose death had been ascertained, but who were irregularly buried in mass graves in the Cementerio General del Sur (cemetery), and to date these efforts have been fruitless; c) “neither the victims nor their representatives have been invited by the State […] to inform them of the timetable for payment of the compensations;” d) “to date there has been no adjustment of the operational plans to address public order disturbances and practice as well as domestic jurisprudence has sanctioned the use of the military in actions pertaining to public order, and e) “no note has been published [in the official gazette] with the excerpts of the judgment of the Court [on the merits] and the obligation to publish the judgments in [one] of the three main national dailies has yet to be fulfilled.” 5. The June 2, 2003 brief with comments by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Commission” or “the Inter-American Commission”), in which they pointed out that the information submitted by the State was obscure and incomplete. The Commission also asserted that: a) the State continues to