Ibsen.” Despite this, the Court finds that, insofar as they are measures of satisfaction, the initiatives designed to conserve the memory of the victims of human rights violations must be implemented in coordination with their next of kin. Therefore, since the representatives indicated that the said act was held without consulting the next of kin of Messrs. Ibsen Peña and Ibsen Castro and without their consent, the Court ordered the State to reach agreement with them on the designation of a public place with their names, in which a plaque should be placed which referred to the Judgment, the facts of the case, and the circumstances in which they occurred, within one year of notification of the Judgment.23 26. In this regard, the State asserted that the public act held on August 2, 2011, in memory of Messrs. Ibsen Peña and Ibsen Cárdenas, was “duly coordinated with the representatives,” and the latter did not deny this. Moreover, the documentation provided by the State includes a note dated November 4, 2010, in which Tito Ibsen Cárdenas, victim and representative in this case, indicated that he and his family: “[Were] extremely appreciative of and value[d] the act of acknowledgment promoted by the office [of the Head of Cultural Affairs of the Municipal Government of La Paz …] based on the recommendation of the […] Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs, and implementing compliance with the judgment of the [Inter-American Court] and the decision […] in the eleventh operative paragraph [… of this]. Therefore, on behalf of [Messrs. Ibsen Peña and Ibsen Cárdenas] and of the family, he] accept[ed] the corresponding designation, which would evidently be accompanied by the corresponding ordinance in the terms established by the [Court,] the purpose of which is […] to recover their historical memory and, in this way, establish a precedent that prevents the perpetration of forced disappearances by the State.”24 27. At the same time, the Court observes that, in their brief of November 14, 2011, the representatives indicated that the Ibsen family had attended the said public act and that the State had “complied strictly” with this measure of reparation, which would indicate that the representatives were in agreement with the way in which the act was carried out. The Court also observes that, according to the information provided by the State, which was not contested by the representatives, the text of the plaque unveiled on that occasion referred to the Judgment of the Inter-American Court and to the fact that this was a case of forced disappearance that occurred “during the military dictatorship from 1971 to 1978.” Consequently, the Court assesses the measures taken by the State and considers that it has complied with this measure of reparation. E) Obligation to provide free medical and psychological or psychiatric treatment immediately, appropriately and effectively, through its specialized public health institutions, to those declared victims in the Judgment who request this (twelfth operative paragraph of the Judgment) 28. The State advised that, on April 8, 2010, the Ministry of Health and Sports and the Caja Petrolera de Salud [National Health Institute] had signed an inter-institutional agreement in order to establish mechanisms that would allow Rebeca Ibsen Castro, Raquel Ibsen Castro, Tito Ibsen Castro and Martha Castro Mendoza full access to medical care and treatment. It also indicated that, “under Law No. 091 of March 2, 2011, the Ministry of Economy and Public Finance was authorized to make the annual inter-institutional                                                              23 Cf. Case of Ibsen Cárdenas and Ibsen Peña v. Bolivia. Judgment of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of September 1, 2010. Series C No. 217, para. 249. 24 Cf. Note of November 4, 2010, addressed to the Head of Cultural Affairs of the Municipal Government of La Paz (file on monitoring compliance, tome I, folio 315). The State also forwarded a copy of Municipal Ordinance GAMLP No. 78/2011 and photographs of the said public act (file on monitoring compliance, tome I, folios 485 to 488). 10