American Commission on the implementation of this measure of reparation (supra having seen paragraph 8). The Court will issue a ruling on compliance with this measure of reparation in due course, in the context of the joint monitoring of compliance with this measure carried out in nine Colombian cases. E. Obligation to establish all the necessary conditions for members of the family of the victim Antonio Flórez Contreras, who are in exile, to return to Colombia, if they so wish, and to cover the moving costs incurred 36. The State pointed out that it has not received information indicating that the Flórez Contreras family wishes to return to Colombia, and reiterated its willingness to coordinate with the representatives and the Florez family regarding the necessary measures to ensure their return, once they express their intention to do so. For their part, the representatives did not submit information or comments on the implementation of this measure of reparation, while the Commission only took note of the information provided by the State, without making any specific observations. 37. This Court appreciates the commitment made by the State to create and guarantee the necessary conditions to enable the members of the Florez family who are in exile to return to Colombia, if they so wish. Similarly, the Court also notes that the representatives have not mentioned this point since the Order of July 8, 2009. 38. Bearing in mind the willingness expressed by Colombia to comply with this measure, the Court deems it pertinent to require the representatives, for the last time, to report on whether the members of the Florez family wish to return to Colombia and, if so, to state the place to which they wish to return and the conditions that they consider necessary to do so. The representatives shall submit such information within the period established in Operative Paragraph 3 of this Order, so that the Court may determine whether it is necessary to continue monitoring this measure. F. Obligation to pay the amounts established in the Judgment for loss of earnings for each of the 19 victims, the expenses incurred by the next of kin of eleven victims and compensation for non-pecuniary damages 39. The State indicated that it has already “paid 100% of the compensation” ordered in the Judgment, despite the fact that the Court has only recognized compliance with 90%, due to the observations of the representatives. In its last report, Colombia requested that the Court declare compliance “in full” with this measure of reparation, given that the representatives have not communicated specific observations on this point. 40. In its brief of November 30, 2011, the representatives noted that the “lack of payment” continues for the family members who are not included in the Judgment but who “have the same characteristics as those who were acknowledged as beneficiaries,” some of whom have filed applications before the contentious-administrative jurisdiction. However, they did not refer to the points pending compliance with this measure of reparation in any of the briefs containing their observations. 41. The Commission indicated that it needed information from the representatives “to make informed observations on the matter.” 14