5 had accrued during the delay in payment of damages. Paraguay explained that its request for forgiveness should be considered in view of the actions the State had taken to comply fully with the terms of the Court's judgment, as well as the complex, difficult process of repeatedly modifying the national budget to include additional amounts for overdue interest payments. According to Paraguay, the payment of overdue interest would require a new budget allocation, meaning that disbursement could not be made until 2009; thus an additional year would elapse before the case could be closed, which in turn would generate more arrearages. 6. That the representative of the victim stated in the private hearing that she "fully acknowledge[d] the Decree and also the payment made to Mr. Canese by bank transfer." She noted, nonetheless, that the payment had been made in 2007, while the judgment dated back to the year 2004. With regard to the State's request for forgiveness, she commented that Paraguay had been aware of its obligation at the time it made the damage payment, and that she as representative "…would not be in a position to accept" the State's request; therefore she would consult with the victim and report back to the Court in due time. 7. That with regard to the State's request for forgiveness of overdue interest, the Commission stated that this matter "should be decided […] by Mr. Canese," and therefore said it would await the victim's opinion on this request. 8. That the Court values the measure adopted by the State of Paraguay to abide by its obligation to pay compensation as ordered in the judgment, reported by the State and accepted by the representative of the victim in the private hearing. Nevertheless, the Court notes that Operative Paragraphs 9 and 12 of the judgment state, respectively, that the "State shall comply with the measures of reparation and reimbursement of costs and expenses ordered in Operative paragraphs 6, 7 and 8 of [the] judgment, within six months of its notification, …" and that if "the State should delay payment, it must pay interest on the amount owed, corresponding to banking interest on arrears in Paraguay." 9. That on the basis of these provisions of the judgment and considering that notification of the judgment was made on September 16, 2004, the deadline for paying pecuniary damage expired on March 16, 2005, and as of that date, the State was in arrears. That in keeping with the provisions of the Court's judgment, the victim will need to express an opinion concerning the State's request. * * * 10. That with regard to the State's obligation to "publish once in the Official Gazette and in another newspaper with national circulation the chapter on the proven facts in this judgment, without the corresponding footnotes, and its operative paragraphs"