not deceased.”8 It explained that “the vouchers for the third payment made to Mr. […] Pino gave rise to some confusion because Mr. Pino had granted a power of attorney to Clementina Cajar de Trujillo so that she could receive the payments.” In this regard, Panama provided the vouchers for the third and fourth payments in favor of the said person, which were made in September 2010 and 2011, respectively. Furthermore, with regard to the deceased victim Ricardo Rivera, the State indicated that his “official heir” had received two checks and provided copies of the latter. 11. The Center for Justice and International Law, representative of both victims, indicated that “those who [it] represented have informed [it] that they have no objection to the payment vouchers.” 12. The Inter-American Commission took note of the information provided by the parties and their observations without making any specific comments in this regard. 13. The Organización de Trabajadores Víctimas did not mention this aspect. 14. Regarding the information provided by the State, the Court notes that Panama provided the vouchers confirming the third payment made in favor of Clementina Cajar de Trujillo who, according to the State, holds a power of attorney for the victim Mario Pino. This was not disputed by Mr. Pino’s representatives who, to the contrary, stated that the individuals they represented had no objections concerning the payments mentioned by the State in its brief of August 2012 (supra considering paragraphs 10 and 11). Consequently, the Court considers that it has been proved that the State has complied with the third payment to the victim Mario Pino. 15. In addition, regarding the payments made to the heir of Ricardo Rivera, the Court observes that the vouchers provided by the State correspond to the second and fourth payment. The Court recalls that, in its Order of June 2012, it asked the State to forward the vouchers corresponding to the third payment to the heirs of this victim, which was the only voucher that was pending, since all the others had already been provided. The InterAmerican Court has still not received the vouchers for the third payment in favor of the said victim. Therefore, the Court asks that the State, within the time frame established in the operative paragraphs of this Order, forward the voucher for the third payment in favor of the heirs of Ricardo Rivera or, if appropriate, the corresponding explanations. b) Fourth payment to three victims who signed the agreements or their heirs 16. Regarding the fourth and last payment of the amounts established in the agreements, the Court recalls that, as established in its Order of June 2012, it was awaiting the vouchers for the fourth payment in favor of a victim who resides in Brazil, César De Obaldia; of a victim regarding whom it had not received confirmation of the said payment, Luis Osorio; as well as of payment to the heir or heirs of the victim who died after the third payment, David Jaen Marin. 17. In this regard, the State advised that César De Obaldia, the victim who resides in Brazil, had “withdrawn his check [corresponding to the fourth payment] on May 5, 2012,” and provided a copy of the check and of the voucher of the payment to Mr. De Obaldia. In addition, Panama provided a copy of the check and receipts for the fourth payment in favor 8 In its Order of June 2012, the Court indicated that the said victim was deceased based on a communication from the Ministry of Labor and Employment, attached to the State’s brief of November 29, 2010, indicating that “Clementina Cajar de Trujillo [is the] official heir of the decedent Mario Pino Batista”. 4