7 985 of March 27, 2008, published in Official Record N° 312 of April 9, 2008, as well as the assets of persons not accused, will be assumed by the State, and their financing will be contemplated in the budget of the National Council on Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (CONSEP), in conformity with the provisions of Art. 9, subsection 1 of the Law on Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances.” Art. 3.- Annul the Substitution Rules on the collection of deposit, custody, and management of assets and liquid assets seized and confiscated delivered to CONSEP, due to violations to Law 108, approved by the Management Board of CONSEP through Resolution N° 013 CD CCC of June 17, 2004, published in the Official Record Nº 376 of July 13, 2004; section 3.10 of Art. 47 of the Organic Rules for Processes of the National Council on Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, CONSEP; Resolution Nº 2008 004 CD, published in Official Record Nº 330 of May 6, 2008; and any other resolution that opposes this one. 19. Mr. Chaparro’s representatives expressed their conformity with the amendments adopted by the CONSEP, included in the report by the State of Ecuador. Mr. Lapo Íñiguez did not refer to compliance with this reparation. 20. The Commission observed that although it does not have a copy of the State’s resolution, “it takes cognizance of that indicated [by Ecuador] and, unless information to the contrary is presented by the victims’ representatives or there are errors in the quoted resolution, it observes that the State has complied with this reparation.” 21. The Court calls to mind that in the Order of April 29, 2009, it declared that the State had partially complied with this obligation, to the extent that it had modified the Rules on the Application of the Law on Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic substances, so that no charges would be made for the deposit and handling of the assets seized from individuals who have not been convicted by final judgment, but that the CONSEP’s internal regulations contrary to said modification remained in effect. 22. Based on the information provided, the Court observes that the CONSEP’s internal regulations were in effect modified, in conformity with that ordered by the Court in its Judgment. Therefore, in view of the foregoing, it declares that the State has fully complied with this obligation. * * * 23. Regarding the duty to adopt forthwith all legislative, administrative or other measures necessary to eliminate ex officio the criminal records of individuals acquitted or whose cases are definitely dismissed (operative paragraph twelve of the Judgment), the State reported that it had performed various regulatory and institutional amendments aimed at protecting individuals’ rights. It indicated that “the Ministry of Justice and Human Rights [...] is conducting a comprehensive reform project on criminal regulations (Criminal Code, Criminal Procedural Code, Code of Execution of Sentences).” It explained that although this reform contemplates “maintaining records of detained individuals [...], these records will guarantee and respect human rights.” In addition, this comprehensive reform will “prohibit judgment based on criminal history” and “will include a provision to eliminate ex officio the criminal records of individuals that have been definitely dismissed and acquitted of the causes of which they had been accused.” Lastly, it indicated that this reform project would be presented before Congress in September 2009. 24. Mr. Chaparro’s representatives observed that “they [did] not have any information on concrete actions taken by the State, therefore they could not provide information in this regard.” Mr. Lapo Íñiguez did not refer to compliance with this reparation. 25. The Inter-American Commission took cognizance of the information presented by the State and expressed that it was awaiting information on advances in this regard.