17 the reimbursement of costs and expenses] by means of a deposit in the banking current account of the representatives”. They stated, however, that “between the date of the Judgment of the Court and the date the payment was made, there was a devaluation of the dollar, in which the Colombian pesos depreciated from $2.579 to $1.895 to the dollar, representing for the beneficiaries […] a decrease of $68.400 [Colombian pesos] for each 100 dollars [ordered in the J]udgment”. Furthermore, the representatives indicated that “the State has seriously failed to complied with the terms established regarding the compensation of minors", in view of the fact that "the compensations [owed to them] were not deposited in a [t]ust fund, as ordered by the Court [in its] Judgment, but in a current account under the name […] of the Ministry of Defense and the corresponding minor". 57. That, in this regard, the Commission indicated that “it positively notes the progress made [by the State] as well as the fact that the discussion about the beneficiaries has been solved in the practice”. Nevertheless, “it considers it is appropriate for the Court to request the State and the representatives to make the necessary clarifications to verify compliance with this measure of reparation”, given the fact that some beneficiaries “expressed having doubts or pointed out some mistakes in relation to the payments mentioned by the State”. 58. That in the Judgment it was ordered the State to pay the compensations for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage, as well as the costs and expenses arising in the domestic sphere and in the international proceedings within the term of one year as of notice of the Judgment of July 28, 2006.21 These payments should be made in United States dollars or the equivalent amount in national currency, using the exchange rate between the two currencies in force on the New York, United States of America, market the day prior to payment to make the respective calculation.22 The Judgment also established the State's obligation to shall pay interest on the amount owed, should it fall into arrears,23 even on the amounts it should have deposited in solvent Colombian institutions in favor of the minors.24 59. That, in the court files there appear Resolutions 5898 and 2088 of December 28, 2007 and May 27, 2008, respectively, but there is no resolution allegedly issued on May 19, 2008 directly related to the compliance with this measure. Nevertheless, it spring from the resolutions on record, the following: first, that the State ordered the payments for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages, as well as the reimbursement of costs and expenses, according to the terms of the Judgment; second, that when calculating the corresponding amounts, the State deducted all those amounts that have been already delivered to some beneficiaries in the conciliation hearings held between the State and the victims before the administrative jurisdiction, pursuant to the terms of the Judgment;25 third, that it took into account the interest on arrears owed to the beneficiaries; fourth, that it was ordered to apply the exchange rate in force on market the day prior to make the respective payment; fifth, that it was ordered that the amounts corresponding to those beneficiaries of legal age be directly distributed to the legal representatives so that they could distribute them to the beneficiaries and sixth, that it was established that the amount corresponding to minors be deposited in a solvent Colombian banking institution, according to the terms of the Judgment. 21 Cf. Case of the Ituango Massacres, supra note 7, para. 417. 22 Cf. Case of the Ituango Massacres, supra note 7, para. 420. 23 Cf. Case of the Ituango Massacres, supra note 7, para. 424. 24 Cf. Case of the Ituango Massacres, supra note 7, para. 422. 25 Cf. Case of the Ituango Massacres, supra note 7, para. 125(101) and 364.