11 34. That as to the payment for reimbursement of expenses (operative paragraph fourteen of the Judgment), the State pointed out that on February 26, 2007 it delivered the amount of US$ 5.000 (five thousand United State dollars) in Guatemalan currency, according to what was ordered by the Court. 35. That the representatives did not object to the above mentioned. 36. That the Commission did not refer to this issue in the private hearing, but it previously pointed out that “the Guatemalan State has complied with that duty”. 37. That it spring from the case file that the State has made the payment so ordered by the Court, and therefore the Court considers that it has fully complied with this part of the Judgment. C) COMMON ISSUES BETWEEN THE JUDGMENTS FERMÍN RAMÍREZ AND RAXCACÓ REYES DELIVERED IN THE CASES OF 38. That as to the duty of the State to abstain from applying the part of Section 12 of the Guatemalan Penal Code regarding the dangerousness of the agent and conform it to the Convention within a reasonable time (operative paragraph eight of the Judgment delivered in the case of Fermín Ramirez) as well as the amendment of Section 201 of the Penal Code (operative paragraph five of the Judgment delivered in the case of Raxcacó Reyes), the State informed that there are preliminary drafts which propose the amendment of such rules but that “they have been observed”; that on March 31, 2008, the Guatemalan Congress was requested to inform on the steps taken to carry out the amendment of such section, request that has still not been answered, which will be transmitted to this Court “in due time”. Furthermore, the State pointed out that the Executive branch is preparing a bill to submit to the Legislative branch, based on the terms ordered in the Judgments delivered in these cases. 39. That, furthermore, as to the State’s duty to abstain from applying the death penalty and executing those convicted of the crime of kidnapping or abduction (operative paragraph six of the Judgment delivered in the case of Raxcacó Reyes), the State pointed out that “[t]he Supreme Court of Justice, by means of its President, Oscar Humberto Vásquez Oliva, informed […] that “the enforcement of the death penalty in the proceedings under process for the crime of [kidnapping or abduction] is suspended by virtue of the Judgment delivered by the Inter-American Court […]. In relation to the delivery of the judgments that declare the validity or inadmissibility of the review of the cases of kidnapping or abduction, in some of these cases, the evidence does not satisfy the requirements established by the Guatemalan penal procedural legislation and it is owing to this, that such distinction exists." 40. That the representatives pointed out that the State has failed to comply with such issues, since by May 2008, no bill has been submitted to the Congress of the Republic in order to modify such provisions of the Guatemalan Penal Code. Besides, they noted that the Commission on Legislation and Constitutional Issues has rejected a bill to repeal the death penalty for the crimes of kidnapping and murder. That they stated that the President has not exercised the authority to present a bill and has not fostered any legislative reforms as ordered by the Court. They consider that the legislative reforms must be extended to all the rules that are included in the categories declared by the Court, that is, those that prescribe the punishment of death penalty for the dangerousness of the agent or those that have broadened the categories of crimes that prescribe death penalty after the ratification of the