5 7. The February 4, 2008 private hearing on monitoring of compliance with the judgment on preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs delivered in the instant case, and the documents and statements submitted to that hearing by the parties.2 8. The Memorandum of Understanding between the State of Paraguay and one of the representatives of the victims and their next of kin, in which the State agreed to adopt a series of measures, within a period of two to six months, for complying with the still-unmet provisions of the judgment (infra Considering clause 13). The State also undertook to adopt measures for victims still in custody, in response to a request by Mrs.Teofista Domínguez, who is a victim and appeared in the private hearing on behalf of the victims and their next of kin (infra Considering clause 14). CONSIDERING: 1. That monitoring compliance with its judgments is a power inherent in the judicial functions of the Court. 2. That Paraguay has been a State Party to the American Convention since August 24, 1989 and, in accordance with Article 62 thereof, acknowledged the adjudicatory jurisdiction of the Court on March 26, 1993. 3. That, pursuant to Article 68(1) of the American Convention, “[t]he States Parties to the Convention undertake to comply with the judgment of the Court in any case to which they are parties.” For such purpose, the States are required to guarantee that the Court’s orders are implemented in decisions made at the domestic level.3 2 The Court, in accordance with Article 6(2) of the Rules of Procedure, conducted the hearing by means of a commission made up of the following judges: Judge Diego García-Sayán, Vice-president; Judge Sergio García Ramírez and Judge Rhadys Abreu Blondet. The following parties appeared at the hearing: a) for the Inter-American Commission: Santiago Canton, Delegate, and Juan Pablo Albán A. and Lilly Ching Soto, advisors; b) for the State of Paraguay: Darío Díaz Camaraza, Public Prosecutor of Paraguay; Arnaldo Frutos, Deputy Minister for Children; Julio Arriola, Business Attaché of the Republic of Paraguay to the Government of the Republic of Costa Rica; Edgar Fidias Taboada Ynsfrán, Director General of Human Rights for the Ministry of Justice and Labor; Francisco Barreiro Perrota, Human Rights Director for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs; Nury Natalia Montiel Mallada, Human Rights Director for the Supreme Court; Silvio Ortega Rolón, Human Rights Director for the Ministry of Public Health and Social Welfare; Sonia Chávez Galeano, Chief of Compliance and Follow-up of Judgments, and Stella Azuaga, Director General of the National Service for Care of Juvenile Offenders; and c) for the representatives of the victims: Liliana Tojo, of the Center for Justice and International Law (CEJIL) and Mrs. Teofista Domínguez. 3 Cfr. I/A Court HR. Case of Baena-Ricardo et al. v. Panama. Competence. Judgment of November 28, 2003, Series C No. 104, par. 131; I/A Court HR. Case of Palamara-Iribarne v. Chile. Monitoring Compliance with Judgment. Order 30 of November, 2007, Considering clause 3; and I/A Court HR. Case of MolinaTheissen v. Guatemala. Monitoring Compliance with Judgment. Order of July 10, 2007, Considering clause 2.