7 courses offered by the Ministry of Justice and Labor and that on September 26, 2009 they started the four first courses in the elaboration of cleaning products, administration of human resources, bakery and pastry, and residential electricity. On the other part, one of the victims entered the Trial Course for Acceptance into the School of Veterinarian Sciences of the University of Asunción and they were exempt from the corresponding tariffs. 20. That regarding the medical and psychological treatment the representatives stated that progress was achieved despite the late start in compliance with this obligation, which occurred in March 2008. The staff of the Ministry of Justice and Labor went to the homes of several victims to start carrying out evaluations and “a systematic plan has been established in order to reach the entire population affected.” However, they indicated that some of the victims have been summoned, for the realization of the medical diagnosis, to the Itauguá Educational Center, where some officials that carried out tasks at the Children’s Reeducation Institute at the time the victims were deprived of freedom are employed. Therefore, some of them do not wish to visit that location out of “fear of being the object of retaliation or a denigrating treatment.” They added that the difficulties to perform the medical diagnosis “cannot be used as a justification by the State for not having done everything within its reach in order to satisfy that ordered by the Court.” They asked the Tribunal to request that the State provide information regarding: i) the specific result of the evaluations performed and their follow-up in order to guarantee the victims’ access to medical and psychological treatments; ii) the processes carried out in order to practice the medical and educational evaluations on the victims that have not yet been contacted, and iii) follow-up that is being performed on those victims who are enrolled in training courses. 21. That during the public hearing the representatives stated that “[t]he information [provided] by the State lacks systematization and the necessary support to be able to evaluate the effective compliance with the obligations.” The State has not informed of the total number of people who have used the benefit of medical attention. Likewise, the State has not presented any document proving the constant psychological additional assistance argued and according to that informed by some of the victims, these have not received psychological attention and they did not seem to be aware it was available. They reiterated that this obligation “implies a positive action on behalf of the State in order to diagnose and treat the physical and psychological consequences the violations had […], reason for which their actions cannot be limited to a mere offer of medical and psychological attention.” With regard to the offer of education programs, they acknowledged that the State’s initiative is important, but some beneficiaries are not aware that the courses are available. 22. That the Commission took note of the processes carried out with the objective of preparing medical charts and offering medical attention to some victims, of granting of a scholarship to one of them, and of the processes carried out to identify and locate the other victims. However, it stated its concern for the limited number of survivors that have been benefited from these reparations, due to “the lack of credibility of the State’s initiatives for the reparation of the damage caused,” and due to the health situation of some of the victims that are deprived of freedom who, given the seriousness of the injuries suffered, should have received assistance. It warned that the offering of those services is an obligation that cannot be delayed. 23. That at the private hearing for monitoring compliance the Commission observed that there would be an agreement to create a system for the registry of the next of kin and it requested that the State inform when that registry would be in operation.