international responsibility in this case, urged the State to consider granting in good faith adequate compensation to the rest of Mr. Rosendo Radilla Pacheco’s relatives who were not identified as victims by the Inter-American Commission (supra Having Seen 1, para. 328), the verification of whether or not the State has agreed to grant such reparations to these relatives of Mr. Radilla Pacheco is not the purpose of this procedure to monitor compliance with this Judgment. Given that this point was not included in the Judgment, the Court cannot rule on this matter. Nevertheless, the Court notes that the State reported that the psychological and/or psychiatric care ordered in the Judgment for Tita, Rosendo and Andrea Radilla Martínez, was also offered to other relatives of Mr. Rosendo Radilla Pacheco who were not considered as victims in the Judgment. Regarding compliance with that measure of reparation, the Court shall issue a ruling at another time. II. Petition by the State. 22. Finally, regarding the obligations to investigate the facts and identify, bring to trial and, if applicable, sanction those responsible, and to determine the whereabouts of Mr. Rosendo Radilla Pacheco, the State requested that the Court allow it to submit information on compliance with these points every six months, and not every three months as required by the Court in its Order of May 19, 2011. Neither the representatives nor the Commission raised any objections in this regard. Therefore, the Court grants the petition of the State, which may submit the aforementioned information every six months. THEREFORE: THE INTER-AMERICAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS, In exercise of its authority to monitor compliance with its decisions, pursuant to Articles 33, 62(1), 62(3), 65, 67 and 68(1) of the American Convention on Human Rights, Articles 25(1) and 30 of its Statute, and Article 31(2) of its Rules of Procedure, DECLARES THAT: 1. In accordance with the relevant provisions of the Considering paragraphs of this Order, compliance is pending with the obligation set forth in Operative Paragraph 17 of the Judgment on Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs issued in this case. AND DECIDES: 1. To require the United Mexican States to adopt such measures as are necessary to effectively and promptly comply with the points that are pending fulfillment, in accordance 8