12 equivalent to the period of time she was held in custody, until she was released in July 2004 (supra Having Seen clauses No. 2(a), 3(a) and 4(a)). Therefore, this Court deeMs. appropriate to issue no ruling on the State’s compliance with this measure pending the decision of the Supreme Court of Peru. 12. That the Peruvian State has not provided any information regarding compliance with operative paragraphs number five, seven, and eight of the Judgment rendered in the instant case, related to the obligation to provide medical and psychological care to the victim through the State’s health services, including the supply of free medication; to provide the victim with a grant for training and professional development, and to reenter the victim in the relevant retirement register. Without appropriate information furnished by the State, this Court cannot exercise its power to monitor compliance with judgments. For the purpose of ensuring compliance with the reparations ordered, the Court must be able to verify and obtain information regarding compliance with the Judgment, which is “the materialization of the protection of the right recognized in the court’s ruling by the proper application of said ruling.”6 13. That it is essential that the State submit up-to-date information on the following obligations set out in the Judgment, which remain unfulfilled, in order for the Court to be able to determine whether they have been effectively and fully complied with: a) compliance with the right to freedom from ex post facto laws and the requirements of due process in the new proceeding brought against Ms. De La Cruz Flores; b) provision of medical and psychological care to the victim through the State’s health services, including the supply of free medication; c) provision of a grant to Ms. De La Cruz Flores for training and professional development; d) and re-entry of Ms. De La Cruz Flores in the respective retirement register, e) publication of the section entitled “Proven Facts” as well as operative paragraphs 1 to 3 of the declaratory part of the Judgment in the Official Gazette; 14. That the Court will determine the general level of compliance with the Judgment on the merits, reparations, and costs of November 18, 2004, once the relevant information on the measures that have not yet been adopted is submitted to the Court. THEREFORE, THE INTER-AMERICAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS, 6 Case of Baena-Ricardo et al., supra note 1, para. 73; and Case of Gómez-Palomino, supra note 2, Considering clause No. 8.