3 to comply with such decisions of the Court. Timely fulfillment of the State’s obligation to report to the Court on the exact manner in which it is complying with each of the aspects ordered by the latter is essential to evaluate the status of compliance in this case.3 Furthermore, the General Assembly of the OAS repeated that, in order for the Court to fully meet its obligation to report to the General Assembly on compliance with its judgments, the States Parties need to provide, in time fashion, the information requested by the Court.4 * * * 6. That the State has informed that: a) in the Order of June 24, 2004, issued by the Special State Prosecutor’s Office for Cases of Force Disappearances, Extrajudicial Executions and Exhumations in Clandestine Graves [ (hereinafter, the “Special Prosecutor’s Office”)5 in relation to Operative Paragraph No. 4 of the Judgment delivered by the Court on September 19, 1996, it is stated that the Special Prosecutor’s Office carried out identification measures in the cemeteries where the remains of the victims Víctor Raúl Neira-Alegría, William Jans Zenteno-Escobar and Edgar Edison Zenteno-Escobar were allegedly buried, and that after verification thereof, the human remains were exhumed. Given the scarce information on the victims held by the Special Prosecutor’s Office, by order of March 4, 2003, it considered it pertinent to apply the identification process to all buried human remains; and b) the Special Prosecutor’s Office submitted a report on June 9, 2003, whereby it reported on the following measures: i) location and identification at the sites where the remains of the inmates killed during the riot of June 18 and 19, 1986 were exhumed; ii) exhumation at the cemeteries of Zapallal, Presbítero Maestro and San Bartolo; iii) anthropological, dental and stomatological, biological and medical tests; iv) interviews with the deceased inmates´ next of kin, among them, Víctor Raúl NeiraAlegría, William Jans Zenteno-Escobar and Edgar Edison Zenteno-Escobar, in order to gather ante-morten information which may help identify the victims; and v) exhumation of human remains at the cemeteries of Pucusana, Pachacámac and Baquijano is still pending, as it is the exhumation at those sites where the corpses of the inmates killed at the riot were buried. 7. That the State informed that on June 24, 2004, the Team of Forensic Experts of the Institute of Forensic Medicine [Instituto de Medicina Legal] submitted the final report containing the identification of 31 human remains, including the remains of Víctor Raúl Neira-Alegría, William Jans Zenteno-Escobar and Edgar Edison ZentenoEscobar. According to said report, the identified human remains would be delivered to the victims´ next of kin on July, 2004; and on July 5, 2004, the remains of the victims in the instant case would be delivered. On July 5, 2004, at the Forensic Thanatological Studies Division [División de Exámenes Tanatológico Forense], Víctor Raúl NeiraAlegría’s next of kin, Aquilina Medina Tapia (wife), Paulina Irene, Marina and Mario Neira-Alegría (siblings) were delivered his remains, the death certificate and the burial 3 Cf. Case of Barrios Altos v. Peru. Monitoring compliance with Judgment. Order of the Court of September 22, 2005, Considering clause No. 7; Case of Palamara-Iribarne, supra note 1, Considering clause No. 7; and Case of Bulacio, supra note 1, Considering clause No. 7. 4 General Assembly, Resolution AG/RES. 2292 (XXXVII-O/07) adopted at the fourth plenary session, held on June 5, 2007, entitled “Observations and Recommendations on the Annual Report of the InterAmerican Court of Human Rights.” 5 Order of the State Prosecutor’s Office No. 631-2002- MP-FN, published in the Official Gazette "El Peruano" on April 20, 2002, whereby the Special Prosecutor’s Office, with national jurisdiction, was created.

Select target paragraph3