5 agreement between the parties to postpone this until the pending arbitration procedure has been completed, and awaits detailed information about the broadcast. 11. However, neither the State nor the representatives have forwarded specific information on the obligation to broadcast the judgment by radio. Consequently, the Court requests the State, within the time frame indicated in the operative paragraphs of this order, to forward complete and detailed information on compliance with the said obligation. b) Regarding the obligation to eliminate the criminal record of those persons who have been acquitted or whose cases have been dismissed, and to implement all necessary legislative measures 12. With regard to the obligation to take forthwith all the legislative, administrative or other measures required to eliminate, ex officio, the criminal record of those persons who have been acquitted or whose cases have been dismissed (twelfth operative paragraph of the judgment), the State repeated the information mentioned in the previous order with regard to normative and institutional reforms to protect human rights. Specifically, it indicated that “the Ministry of Justice and Human Rights […] is preparing a bill with a comprehensive reform of the criminal laws (the Penal Code, the Code of Criminal Procedure and the Code on Execution of Sentences).” It explained that, although the reform included “keeping records of all those detained […], the records will guarantee and respect human rights.” In addition, the said comprehensive reform “will prohibit judging a person based on any previous record” and “will include a provision to eliminate, ex officio, the record of those persons who have been acquitted or whose cases have been dismissed.” 13. Mr. Chaparro observed that “the National Assembly has not yet begun to process the bill on the criminal law reform prepared by the Ministry of Justice, Human Rights and Worship[; consequently, he considered] that the actions undertaken on this point are insufficient.” Mr. Lapo Íñiguez did not refer to compliance with this measure of reparation. 14. The Inter-American Commission noted that “in August 2009, when the State presented this information the first time, it indicated that the bill on the reform of criminal procedure would be submitted to the Legislative Assembly in September 2009. However, […] it has not presented specific information on whether the bill was effectively submitted, on progress in its discussion and approval, or on how this progress relates to the measure of reparation ordered. 15. The Court observes that the State has not provided current information on the “bill for the comprehensive reform of criminal legislation,” mentioned in the Court’s previous order issued in the context of monitoring compliance in this case and reiterates that it lacks information on measures towards the elimination, ex officio, of the criminal record of the persons who have been acquitted or whose cases have been dismissed. Consequently, it requests the State to report on the measures adopted to comply with the reparation established in the judgment within the time frame indicated in this order. c) Regarding the obligation to submit to an arbitration procedure to establish the amounts corresponding to pecuniary damage 16. In relation to the obligation of the State and Mr. Chaparro to submit to an arbitration procedure in order to establish the amounts corresponding to pecuniary damage (thirteenth operative paragraph of the judgment), the State advised that, through the Ministry of Justice and Human Rights, it had hired an independent company to make the necessary technical appraisal to determine the value of Mr. Chaparro’s pecuniary and non-pecuniary