-12- a) the State’s second report did not include any information regarding the work of the Coordination Team mentioned in the State’s first report, or any other aspect of the State’s compliance with its obligation to investigate, prosecute and punish those responsible. The Commission is deeply concerned that after more than twenty years, the attack on the Moiwana Village, which included the death and the displacement of the survivors, has not been investigated; b) as in its first report, the State did not include any information regarding its obligation to recover and transfer the remains of those killed in the attack. The Commission underscores the importance of this obligation, especially in light of the Moiwana community’s deeply held religious and cultural traditions and its reverence for proper burials for the dead; c) the State’s report did not include copies or summaries of the Land Right Commission’s reports or activities. While the Commission appreciates the State’s efforts to address the issue of land rights in general, there is no information to date to indicate that such Commission would contribute to identify and title the traditional territories of this group; d) with regards to the guarantees of safety for those who decide to return to Moiwana, the Commission highlights the importance of an ongoing dialogue between the parties to form part of an eventual return. Given the lack of detailed information about this process, the Commission is unable to conclude whether the State has taken meaningful steps to comply with this aspect of the Judgment at this time; e) the State’s second report makes no mention of the Foundation Fund Development or its activities. The Commission is concerned that, a year after its creation, no information has been provided to indicate that any projects addressing health, housing and educational needs have been funded; f) the Commission appreciates the State’s efforts in the construction of a public memorial and hopes that it will continue to adopt all the measures necessary to comply with this obligation in the immediate future; and g) regarding the payment of compensation for material and moral damages and costs, the Commission notes that although the documents provided by the State along with its second report do not contain the names of the individuals to whom payments have been made, the Representatives have indicated that the State has complied with this obligation to their satisfaction. Therefore, the Commission recognizes and values the State’s actions and considers that it has fully complied with this aspect of the Judgment. WHEREAS: 1. Monitoring compliance with its decisions is an inherent power of the judicial functions of the Court. 2. Suriname became a State Party to the American Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Convention”) and recognized the jurisdiction of the Court on November 12, 1987. 3. Pursuant to Article 68(1) of the American Convention, “[t]he State Parties to the Convention undertake to comply with the judgment of the Court in any case to