8 internal law as justification for its failure to perform a treaty.2 The treaty obligations of the States Parties are binding for all the powers and organs of the State. 7. That the States Parties to the Convention must ensure compliance with its provisions and their inherent effects (effet utile) within their respective domestic legal systems. This principle is applicable not only with regard to the substantive norms of human rights treaties (that is, those which contain provisions concerning the protected rights), but also with regard to procedural norms, such as those referring to compliance with the decisions of the Court. These obligations shall be interpreted and applied so that the protected guarantee is truly practical and effective, bearing in mind the special nature of human rights treaties.3 8. That the State Parties to the Convention which have acknowledged the binding jurisdiction of the Court have the duty to comply with the obligations imposed by this Tribunal. In this respect, Peru has to adopt all the measures necessary to effectively comply with the orders passed by the Court in its Judgment of July 8, 2004 (supra Having Seen clause No. 1). This obligation includes the duty on the part of the State to report to the Court on the measures adopted to comply with the orders contained in the Court’s Judgment. Timely compliance with the State’s obligation to report to the Court on how the State is complying with each of the orders passed by the Court is fundamental to assess the status of compliance in the case under review. * ** 9. That, on monitoring comprehensive compliance with the Judgment in the present case, and after analyzing the information provided by the State, the Commission, the victims and their representatives, by way of their submissions on compliance with Judgment (supra Having Seen clauses No. 3, 4, 5, 6 and 8), The Court has identified the orders contained in the Judgment that have been complied with, as well as those which are still pending compliance. 10. That the State remitted a copy of the videotape recorded during the ceremony of acknowledgment of responsibility in amends for the events, held on July 15, 2005, evidencing the presence of the Vice-Minister of Justice, and the representatives of the civil society, clergymen, means of communication and the victims’ next of kin in this present case, including the presence of Ms. Jacinta Peralta Allccarima, who held the floor and addressed the audience present at such event (supra Having Seen clause No. 3(b)). 11. That the State submitted copies of the publications of the relevant parts of the Judgment, on December 22, 2005, in “El Peruano” official newspaper, and on 2 Cf. Case of the “Five Pensioners”. supra note 1, Considering clause No. 7; Case of BámacaVelásquez, supra note 1, Considering clause No. 5; and Case of the Juvenile Reeducation Institute, supra note 1, Considering clause No. 5. 3 Cf. Case of the “Five Pensioners”, supra note 1, Considering clause No. 8; Case of Bámaca Velásquez, supra note 1, Considering clause No. 6; and Case of the Juvenile Reeducation Institute, supra note 1, Considering clause No. 6.