7 32. Under this order, the State is required to take all the measures necessary to ensure that the full amount ordered for the minor Macaela Suárez Ramadán is deposited in said trust fund and that the amount shall not be subject to taxes of any kind at the time the trust is set up or to any withholding tax. In this regard, the Court has already stated that The Court interprets the expression under the most favorable conditions as referring to the fact that any act or measure by the trustee must ensure that the amount assigned maintains its purchasing power and generates sufficient earnings or dividends to increase it; the phrase permitted by […] banking practice indicates that the trustee must faithfully perform his task as would a good head of family and that he has the power and the obligation to select diverse types of investment, whether through deposits in strong currencies, such as the United States dollars or others, the purchase of mortgage bonds, real estate, guaranteed securities or any other investment recommended by […] banking practice, precisely as ordered by the Court (Velásquez Rodríguez Case, Interpretation of the Compensatory Damages Judgment of August 17, 1990 (Art. 67 American Convention on Human Rights). Series C No.9, paragraph 31). As for the proceeds from the trust fund, the State is duty-bound to take the necessary measures to protect the minor’s interests against inflation, insolvency, negligence or the incompetence of the trustee. VI ON PAYMENT OF COSTS AND EXPENSES 33. As previously stated (supra 19), the Court will also interpret operative paragraph three of the judgment on reparations, in light of operative paragraph four thereof, wherein exemption from payment of taxes on costs and expenses is ordered. 34. The State’s contention was that “the amount fixed for the claimant’s attorneys, Dr. Alejandro Ponce Villacís and Dr. Richard Wilson, is taxable” and made the following arguments to support its case: a) b) c) d) The amounts for the professionals who represent the claimants are for the practice of their profession. By ordering that the payments shall be exempt from any existing or future tax or surcharge, the Court is establishing an exemption; under the domestic legal system, exemptions may only be established by law and not by some foreign judgment. A principle of tax law reflected in Article 3 of the Ecuadorian Tax Code gives the State sole authority to establish, modify or extinguish taxes: no law, no tax. The sums for the attorneys’ fees cannot nor should they be taxed merely because they represented the claimants; on the other hand, they cannot be exempt from the general taxes that other professionals in Ecuador must always pay. 35. For its part, the Commission argued that since the payment of fees was an element of the reparations, it should be accorded the same tax treatment that the payment of compensatory damages receives and that any tax upon them should be covered by the State. 36. Mr. Suárez Rosero’s argument was that the State was mistaken; that what the Court had ordered was payment of costs and expenses, not fees. He further argued