35 93. As mentioned above (supra paras. 62.g and 82.g), the State indicated that, pursuant to Article 2 of the Convention and its constitutional procedures, it was in the process of adopting the necessary measures in order to eliminate cinematographic censorship and thus allow exhibition of the film “The Last Temptation of Christ”. 94. On January 31, 2001, the State submitted its observations on the Commission’s brief on expenses (supra para. 41), indicating that: a) there was no documentary, accounting or financial evidence to indicate that the cost of the airfare for a lawyer of the Asociación de Abogados por las Libertades Públicas A.G. to travel to Washington, D.C., to take part in a hearing before the InterAmerican Commission during its 98th session, was in fact paid by that organization; b) invoice No. 4526 does not comply with the requirement of referring to necessary and essential expenses incurred by the parties to the litigation, as it is not in the name of any of the parties; and c) invoices Nos. 4540, 4541 and 4542 were issued for hotel accommodation and food corresponding to November 16 to 19, 1999; however, the public hearing on merits held at the seat of the Court was only on November 18, 1999. Those expenses cannot be attributed to attending the hearing, and this argument applied to the airfares also. * * * The considerations of the Court 95. Article 63(1) of the American Convention establishes that: If the Court finds that there has been a violation of a right or freedom protected by this Convention, the Court shall rule that the injured party be ensured the enjoyment of his right or freedom that was violated. It shall also rule, if appropriate, that the consequences of the measure or situation that constituted the breach of such right or freedom be remedied and that fair compensation be paid to the injured party. 96. In the instant case, the Court has established that the State violated Article 13 of the Convention and failed to comply with its Articles 1(1) and 2. 97. With regard to Article 13 of the Convention, the Court considers that the State must modify its legal system in order to eliminate prior censorship and allow the cinematographic exhibition and publicity of the film “The Last Temptation of Christ”, because it is obliged to respect the right to freedom of expression and to guarantee its free and full exercise to all persons subject to its jurisdiction. 98. With regard to Articles 1(1) and 2 of the Convention, the norms of Chilean domestic legislation that govern the exhibition and publicity of cinematographic production have still not been adapted to the provision of the American Convention that prior censorship is prohibited. Therefore, the State continues to fail to comply with the general obligations referred to in those provisions of the Convention. Consequently, Chile must adopt the appropriate measures to reform its domestic laws, as set out in the previous paragraph, in order to ensure the respect and enjoyment of the right to freedom of thought and expression embodied in the Convention.