6 18. That the representatives pointed out that the State had not submitted any documents to support the information provided as to compliance with this obligation. They further highlighted that “[n]or was information reported on the text of the public acknowledgment or a draft thereof, or about whether the State had taken the necessary steps to place a plaque in memory of the victim.” Finally, they pointed out that the term for fulfilling such obligation had expired. 19. That the Commission stated that it “expects the State to adopt forthwith the necessary actions to fulfill the foregoing obligation.” 20. That the Court notes that fulfillment of this obligation has been delayed, as the term set for that purpose was one year as from notice of the Judgment. In this regard, the Court reminds the State of the importance of progress in compliance with this reparation measure, given the symbolic value it has as a guarantee of non-repetition of such serious events in the future. Therefore, the State is requested to submit updated information on the steps taken in order to comply with said obligation. * * * 21. That regarding the obligation of the State to provide medical, psychological, and psychiatric treatment, as appropriate, to De Belén Areco, Pedro Vargas, and Juan, María Elisa, Patricio, Daniel, Doralicia, Mario, María Magdalena, Sebastián, and Jorge Ramón, all of them Vargas-Areco, if they so require, and for as long as necessary (eleventh operative paragraph of the Judgment), the State pointed out that “the Ministry of Public Health and Social Welfare too[k] the necessary steps before [the] Director of Pedro Juan Caballero Regional Hospital so that the parents of the minor Gerardo Vargas-Areco receive treatment.” 22. That the representatives pointed out that the State has not submitted any documents showing that the Ministry of Public Health and Social Welfare has taken any steps before the Director of Pedro Juan Caballero Regional Hospital, nor has it stated that the victims are effectively receiving treatment at said hospital. They further argued that “[th]e State’s report […] does not refer to the steps taken in order to provide treatment to the victim’s siblings, as ordered in the Judgment.” Finally, they pointed out that “the obligation to provide treatment to the victim’s next of kin must be met forthwith” and that said obligation “implies making all necessary resources available so that said persons may effectively receive […] treatment, which means allowing them transport facilities to go to said hospital, providing hospital treatment at special hours, designating medical staff for the respective diagnosis and treatment, supplying them with free medication and other measures.” 23. That the Commission requested the State to “inform the Court in detail on the specific measures adopted so that all Gerardo Vargas-Areco’s next of kin may be provided forthwith with medical treatment as ordered in [the J]udgment.”