5 the victims, as well as removing all obstacles and mechanisms of fact and law that maintain the impunity in the instant case; in particular, on the measures adopted in order to enforce the arrest warrants issued in relation to this case (supra Having Seen clause 1). The Tribunal shall promptly assess said information when examining the status of compliance with operative paragraph eight of the Judgment. * * * 10. That, in relation to the operative paragraph nine, regarding the publication of the Chapter on facts proven of this Judgment, without the corresponding footnotes, and the operative part of the same, the State informed that on April 28, 2008 the pertinent parts of the Judgment were published in the official newspaper called La Gaceta Nº 31.593 (supra Having Seen clause 3). 11. That the representatives confirmed that the State published the texts ordered by this Court in La Gaceta Nº 31.593 on April 28, 2008 (supra Having Seen clause 4). 12. That in the observations of July 9, 2008, the Commission valued that the State had made such publication, complying, in this way, with the terms established in said operative paragraph of the Judgment delivered by the Court (supra Having Seen clause 5). 13. That in accordance with the statements made by the parties, the Tribunal deems that the State has complied with the operative paragraph nine of the Judgment (supra Having Seen clause 1). * * * 14. That in relation to the operative paragraph ten, regarding the performance of a public act of acknowledgment of the State’s international responsibility, in the report of May 19, 2008, the State expressed that considering “[…] the arguments presented by the representatives [… it was] willing to verify one more time the act of Acknowledgment of International Responsibility […] and apologize to the victims' next-of-kin […]”, therefore it was carrying out the necessary measures to such end (supra Having Seen clause 3). 15. That on June 24, 2008 the representatives confirmed the information furnished by the State and pointed out that, in fact, on June 13, 2008, a new public act was performed and the President of Honduras, the representatives and the victims’ next-of-kin took part in it. In such act, the President publicly acknowledged the international responsibility of the State for the execution of the four victims of the instant case and apologized to the victims and their next-of-kin. Based on the foregoing, the representatives considered that the State duly complied with the Court’s decision (supra Having Seen clause 4). 16. That, in the observations of July 9, 2008, the Commission valued the performance of the acts of acknowledgment of international responsibility, and therefore the State has complied with the Tribunal’s decision (supra Having Seen clause 5). 17. That, by virtue of the information furnished by the parties, the Court notes that on April 18, 2007, the State performed the first public act of acknowledgment of its international responsibility which, since it did not meet the representatives' expectations, was once again performed on June 13, 2008. This time, the President of Honduras publicly