120 90. The State expressed its agreement with the Court setting the amount for costs and expenses, insofar as “those expenses are fully verifiable with legal documents supporting the disbursements made”. Considerations of the Court 91. The Court, pursuant to the provisions of Article 63(1) of the American Convention and its case law,98 deems it equitable to recognize as costs and expenses US$18,000.00 (eighteen thousand United States dollars) to Jennifer Harbury and US$5,000.00 (five thousand United States dollars) to CEJIL. X METHOD OF COMPLIANCE Arguments of the representatives of the victims 92. In their May 8, 2001 brief, the representatives of the victims stated that “there must be an effective mechanism to ensure compliance with the judgment on reparations” and to this end they requested that the Court hold a hearing, six months after the rendering of this judgment, for the State to inform the Court regarding compliance with it, especially regarding delivery of the mortal remains of Mr. Bámaca Velásquez to his next of kin. In case this delivery does not occur, if that is due to causes attributable to the State, the representatives would request at the appropriate time that Guatemala have to pay a daily sum until the body is found and delivered to the next of kin. At the public hearing on reparations, the representatives of the victims added that the aforementioned sum would reflect a “monetary translation of the continuing damage caused by anguish and suffering […] that exists with a forced disappearance”. 93. The representatives of the victims also requested that compensation be paid within six months time, in United States dollars, deposited to “an account previously opened abroad for this purpose”, as well as that it be exempt from any current or future taxes in Guatemala and that, for every day of non-payment, current banking interest be recognized, in accordance with the case law of this Court. Arguments of the Commission 94. The Commission requested that the Court order that: a) 98 the State must comply with all measures of reparation within six months of the issuance of the respective judgment, after which time it must report on compliance with it, and the Court could have to hold a public hearing “to consider any matters pertaining to this point that have not been definitively resolved”; See Cantoral Benavides Case, Reparations, supra note 5, para. 87; Mayagna (Sumo) Awas Tingni Community Case, supra note 7, para. 169; Cesti Hurtado Case, Reparations, supra note 5, para. 73; Villagrán Morales et al. Case, Reparations, supra note 5, para. 109; and Paniagua Morales et al. Case, Reparations, supra note 5, para. 217.