-5- 8. That […] [the court] has found that, although Paraguay has reported several actions taken in order to comply with the Judgment, none of the reparations contained in said Judgment has been fulfilled by the State. In this respect, the Court leaves record of the fact that over ten months have passed since the expiry date of the terms granted within which Paraguay had to fulfill said reparations. 9. That the Court deems it indispensable that the State should adopt all the measures necessary to fulfill the reparations ordered by this Tribunal in its Judgment, and that the State should provide updated and detailed information on such compliance. 9. That the Secretariat, following first the instructions of the President and then the instructions of the Court, sent notes to the State reminding it that May 24, 2006, had been the due date of the term for submission of the referenced report on compliance with Judgment, and therefore it requested that the State should file said report as soon as practicable. The State filed said report on September 13, 2006, — approximately three and a half months after its due date for submission. 10. That the Court has found that the submission made by the State on September 13, 2006 (supra Having Seen clause No. 5), in response to the command of this Court by means of its Order of February 2, 2006, (supra Having Seen clause No. 2), repeats the same information filed by the State with this Court on October 5, 2006. In other words, the State has failed to provide updated and detailed information as requested by Order of February 2, 2006. In said submissions, Paraguay has reported that certain actions —without further details— have been implemented in order to comply with said Judgment. However, none of the reparations ordered in Judgment of August 31, 2004 (supra Having Seen clause No. 1) has been fulfilled by the State. 11. That this Court is concerned that approximately three and a half months after the due date for submission of the State’s report on compliance with judgment, the State provided this Court with the same information contained in the State’s previous report. 12. That the Court is concerned that the State has not fulfilled the reparations ordered in said Judgment, although the term for compliance expired on March 17, 2005. 13. That the State Parties to the Convention which have acknowledged the binding jurisdiction of the Court have the duty to comply with the obligations imposed by this Tribunal. In this respect, Paraguay has to adopt all the measures necessary to effectively comply with the orders passed by the Court in its Judgment of August 31, 2006 (supra Having Seen clauses No. 1 and 2) and in this Order. This obligation includes the duty on the part of the State to report to the Court on the measures adopted to comply with the orders contained in the Court’s Judgment. Timely compliance with the State’s obligation to report to the Court on how the State is complying with each of the orders passed by the Court is fundamental to assess the status of compliance in the case under review. That the obligation to inform the Court about compliance with judgment is an 14. obligation that, to be fulfilled effectively, requires the formal presentation of a