E. The State must implement, within a reasonable time, permanent education programs on human rights addressed to members of the intelligence services, the Armed Forces, as well as judges and prosecutors (operative paragraph nine) 27. The State offered information on different human rights programs for officials of the Ministry of the Interior, for example: The Office of Police Education and Doctrine included in its curriculum the subject of Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law in its educational, training, specialization and continuing education courses within the Police Education System; the Division of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the Armed Forces since 2003 created the Center for International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights Law of the Ministry of Defense; the Army, Air Force, and Navy Intelligence Offices provided courses in Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law, as part of their curriculum; the Office of Education and Doctrine of the Peruvian National Police provided the curriculum of five bodies of the National Police educational system, where courses on Human Rights are offered, among other courses. In regard to the Military-Police Forum, it noted that: on October 22, 1996 the Center for Advanced Studies on Military Justice [Centro de Altos Estudios de Justicia Militar (CAEJM for its acronym in Spanish)] was created, as a dependant body of the Supreme Tribunal of the Military-Police Forum, in order to prepare and provide continuing education to the personnel of the Military Judicial Corps, in which five First Level courses for Military-Police Magistrates have been implemented and concluded, as well as a course for Legal Assistants; among others. With regard to the Public Prosecutor’s Office (of the Nation), the State noted that the Office of the Superior Criminal National Prosecutor’s Office and the Supra-provincial Criminal Prosecutor’s Office reported on the trainings offered to the administrative personnel and prosecutors on human rights protection, carried out academic events (seminars, workshops, conferences, and other events) on human rights and authorized the participation of the Superior Coordinating Prosecutor, Superior Prosecutors, Provincial Prosecutors, Provincial Deputy Prosecutors, and administrative personnel to contribute to the trainings and continuing education in order to improve their professional capabilities. In terms of the Ministry of Defense, the State noted that “in the Training School for Officers, Technicians, and non-commissioned officers of the Army, subjects on Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law are provided to all cadets and students in their general training.” 28. Similarly, they submitted information provided by the National Commission for the Study and Application of International Humanitarian Law (CONADIH for its acronym in Spanish) which states that the Ministry of Defense is providing education on International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and Human Rights (HR) in its centers such as the Center for National Studies (CAEN for its acronym in Spanish) and the Centre for International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights, which are responsible for organizing and conducting training programs for the Armed Forces and personnel at nationwide and decentralized State institutions. 29. By way of a brief dated August 8, 2013, the representatives mentioned that “the mere existence of training courses within the various State agencies is not sufficient to demonstrate compliance with this measure of reparation,” since “the State’s brief does not make reference to the content of the courses, their duration, the people who teach and number of students attending, and their impact on ensuring the non-repetition of the events referred to in this case.” 30. The Court recalls that in its Judgment it noted, as a basis for ordering the guarantee of non-repetition, that "the violations attributable to the State […] were perpetrated by State 9