2 No. 2) according to operative paragraph two of the Order of the Court of November 21, 2007 (supra Having Seen clause No. 4.) 6. The communication of August 29, 2008, whereby the State informed that “communications ha[d] been served on the pertinent authorities such as […] the Supreme Court of Justice and the Ministry of Justice in order to inform them of the progress of compliance with the Judgment on reparations and costs (supra Having Seen clause No. 2.) 7. The brief of May 6, 2009, whereby the State submitted a report on the progress of compliance with the Judgment on reparations and costs (supra Having Seen clause No. 2.) In said brief, the State pointed out that “[a]s part of its international obligations […] it would forward a supplementary report […] to be properly assessed.” Said report was never received. 8 The brief of June 5, 2009, in which the representatives of the victims (hereinafter, the “representatives”) submitted their comments on the State’s report (supra Having Seen clause No. 7.) 9. The note of July 1st, 2009 by which the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter, the “Commission” or the “Inter-American Commission”) submitted its comments on the State’s reports (supra Having Seen clause No. 7.) 10. The Order issued by the President of August 12, 2009, through which she summoned the Inter-American Commission, the State and the representatives to a private hearing so that the Court may gather information from the State regarding compliance with the judgments delivered in the instant case, and hear the comments of both the Commission and the representatives on the same. 11. The private hearing was held at the seat of the Court in San José de Costa Rica on October 1st, 2009.3 12. The communication of October 30, 2009, whereby the State forwarded to the Court a copy of the “[d]ecision issued on appeal by the First Civil Division of the Superior Court of Justice of Santa Cruz,” in relation to the pending criminal proceedings instituted against the alleged perpetrators of the forced disappearance of José Carlos Trujillo-Oroza, and submitted information on the application of a specific schedule to search for the mortal remains of José Carlos Trujillo-Oroza. 13. The communication of the Commission and the brief of the representatives of November 13, 2009, whereby they submitted, respectively, their comments on the State’s report (supra Having Seen clause No. 12.) CONSIDERING: 1. That Bolivia has been a State Party to the American Convention since July 19, 1979, and that accepted the binding jurisdiction of the Court on July 27, 1993. 3 The following persons attended the hearing: by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, Silvia Serrano-Guzmán and Karla Quintana-Osuna; by the representatives, Alejandra Arancedo, Liliana Tojo, Sergio Fuensálida and Pablo Erick Solón-Romero-Oroza, and by the State, Víctor Montecinos, Alternate Agent; Fiorella Caldera, Officer of the Legal Defense Unit; Blanca Alarcón, Judge of the Superior Court of the District of La Paz and Jovanka Oliden-Tapia, Business Chief Officer a.i. of the Embassy of Bolivia in Costa Rica.