7 assume international responsibility when already established.2 The treaty obligations of the States Parties are binding for all the powers and organs of the State. 7. That the States Parties to the American Convention must ensure compliance with its provisions and their inherent effects (effet utile) within their respective domestic legal systems. This principle is applicable regarding not only to the substantive norms of human rights treaties (that is to say, the ones containing provisions about the protected rights), but also to the procedural norms, such as those referring to compliance with the decisions of the Court. These obligations must be interpreted and applied so that the guarantee protected is truly practical and effective, bearing in mind the special nature of human rights treaties.3 8. That the States Parties to the Convention that have accepted the compulsory jurisdiction of the Court have the duty to comply with the obligations ordered by the Court. In such sense, Peru must adopt all the provisions necessary in order to effectively comply with the provisions of the Court in the Judgment of November 25, 2004 (supra, Having Seen clause No. 1). Such obligation includes the State’s duty to report to the Court on the provisions adopted to comply with the measures ordered by the Court in the aforementioned Judgment. The State’s prompt compliance with this obligation to inform the Court about the manner in which it is complying with each one of the measure ordered by the Court is fundamental for assessing the status of compliance with the judgment as a whole. * * * 9. That when monitoring full compliance of the Judgment on the merits, reparations and legal costs in the instant case, and after considering the information brought forth by the State, by the Commission and by the representatives in their briefs on compliance with the Judgment (supra Having Seen clauses No. 3 through 5), the Court has examined with which provisions in the aforementioned Judgment the State has complied, as well as those with which compliance is still pending. 10. that the representatives did not file the information requested by the Secretariat of the Court relating to compliance with the requests in operative paragraphs three, regarding to the obligation to publish the pertinent excerpts from the Judgment, and seven and eleven, regarding to the payment of compensation for legal costs and expenses sustained in court. On account of the foregoing, this Tribunal will assess compliance with such obligations on the basis of the information provided by the State and by the Commission. 11. That the State has complied with the obligation to: a) publish in the Diario Oficial (Official Gazette) and in another national daily newspaper, both the Section entitled “Proven Facts” and the operative paragraphs of the Judgment, for such excerpts have been published in the 2 Cf. Case of the “Five Pensioners”, supra note 1, Considering clause No. 7; Case of BámacaVelásquez, supra note 1, Considering clause No. 5, and Case of the “Juvenile Reeducation Institute”, supra note 1, Considering clause No. 5. 3 Cf. Case of the “Five Pensioners”, supra note 1, Considering clause No. 8; Case of BámacaVelásquez, supra note 1, Considering clause No. 6, and Case of the “Juvenile Reeducation Institute”, supra note 1, Considering clause No. 6.