and exhaustive medical check-up had been provided that was personalized and that took place in the home of Mrs. De Belén Areco. She was prescribed medication […], that was supplied by the Ministry of Health, even though it was not among the medicines distributed […] to the rest of the population." On this point, the State submitted that the treatment surpasses "by far, the health services normally provided in the country’s public institutions." The State explained that according to the reports collected from the Health Center in the Bella Vista Norte neighborhood, via the Human Rights Unit of the Ministry of Public Health and Social Well-being, the family is currently in good physical and psychological health and is receiving regular care. With regard to Mrs. De Belén Areco, the State indicated that she receives treatment, as well as monthly medication provided by the Bella Vista Norte Health Center. Taken into account this regular aid to the family, as well as the absence of new health needs, the State requested that this point be declared to have been complied with. 14. The representatives confirmed that the family members have a special card, but indicated that contrary to the information provided by the State, Mrs. De Belén Areco de Vergas “is not regularly receiving the medication she needs from the Health Center indicated, nor is she receiving full and uninterrupted assistance," despite having been diagnosed with cardiovascular disease that requires regular medication. Likewise, they observe that although it is true that in the year 2010, the medication was sent by the Ministry of Health, this only happened once. Since then, Mrs. De Belén Areco de Vargas “has had to buy her medication on her own" and, with the exception of the aforementioned occasion, "it is very difficult to access care with the doctor indicated." They therefore requested that the procedure for providing access to specialized treatment and the reimbursement of expenses be made more simple and effective. 15. The Commission expressed appreciation for the progress made by the State in complying with this obligation by providing identification cards to the relatives that allow them to access preferential and personalized medical treatment. However, it observed that the parties disagree with regard to the continuity and regularity of the provision of medical treatment, in particular with regard to Mrs. De Belén Areco. For this reason, it argued that the Court should not consider this point of the judgment as being complied with until it has more specific, complete, and updated information indicating that the health measures are being provided to the family members in an effective and permanent manner. 16. The Court expresses appreciation for the progress made by the State as far as the provision of identification cards to the victims that allow them to access preferential medical treatment. However, the Court notes that the information submitted by the State and the representatives of the victims is not in agreement with regard to the continuity and regularity of the medical treatment and the provision of medication prescribed to Mrs. De Belén Areco de Vargas, who, according to the comments submitted by the representatives, has had to purchase the medication herself despite having been diagnosed with a cardiovascular disease that requires regular medication whose provision should be paid for by the Ministry of Health. Regarding this, the Court recalls that, pursuant to what was decided in the Judgment (supra having seen paragraph 1), the State has an obligation to provide any medical and psychological treatment needed by the victims “for the time needed” and “as determined by the professionals in charge of their treatment,” “free of charge and including necessary exams and medications.” This is not exhausted with the provision of identification cards to the victims or the one-time provision of medication that is needed regularly. Based on this, the Court asks the State to submit updated, detailed 6