3 Judgment and listen to the respective observations of the Inter-American Commission and the common interveners. 11. The brief of June 9, 2009, by which the common interveners informed that the "Ministry of Economy and Finance [... stated, as to the] requirements of the payment ordered by this […] Court [,] that the amounts due as reparations should not be deducted from the budget al.locations”. 12. The brief of June 9, 2009 of one of the victims, by means of which the victim referred to the compliance with the Judgment, as well as the Secretariat’s note of June 18, 2009 whereby it was informed that said brief would not be forwarded to the other parties, given that the brief was not addressed to the Court through a common intervener. 13. The briefs of June 24, July 3, 6 and 7, 2009 by means of which groups of victims and one of the representatives made reference to the alleged non-compliance with operative paragraph four of the Judgment, as well as the Secretariat’s notes of July 2 and 7, 2009, by which it was repeated that the different victims, relatives or duly accredited representatives must address to the Tribunal through the common intervener or, if applicable, the Commission, but that, for that one time only, the briefs would be forwarded to the other parties. 14. The hearing held on July 8, 2009 during the LXXXIII Period of Ordinary Sessions of the Tribunal at its seat,2 as well as the documents presented by the Commission and the State during the hearing. 15. The Secretariat's note of July 15, 2009 by means of which, following the instructions of the President of the Court, the State was requested to forward, no later than July 31, 2009, the documentation that, during the hearing, it informed it would forward after such hearing. 16. The brief of July 21, 2009 by which the common interveners submitted observations once said hearing was held. 17. The communication of July 27, 2009 by means of which one of the victims forwarded a copy of the order of May 8, 2009 issued in file N° 204-2009-C.I.LIMA and three press clippings, in relation to the compliance with the Judgment, as well as the Secretariat’s note of August 3, 2009, in which it was repeated that the different victims, relatives or duly accredited representatives must address to the Tribunal through the common intervener of the victims' representatives; therefore, said brief would not be forwarded to the other parties on that occasion. 18. The brief of July 31, 2009 by which the State forwarded a report in response to the request made in the Secretariat’s note of July 15, 2009 (supra Having Seen clause 15). 19. The briefs of August 14 and 19, 2009 by which the common interveners and the Commission filed, respectively, their observations to the state report of July 31, 2009. 20. The brief of October 21, 2009, by which the common interveners forwarded additional information related to the compliance with the Judgment. 2 To this hearing, there appeared Mr. Francisco Ercilio Moura and Javier Mujica Petit, of the Peruvian Centro de Asesoría Laboral (CEDAL), common interveners of the representatives; on behalf of the Inter-American Commission, Adviser Lilly Ching Soto; and on behalf of the State, Supranational Specialized Attorney General Mrs. Delia Muñoz Muñoz; Advisor to the President of the Congress of the Republic Mr. Rodolfo Reyna Salinas; Head of Legal Affairs of the Congress of the Republic Mr. Edgar Chauca López; Adviser to the Supranational Specialized Attorney General’s Office Mrs. Erika Ramos Arteaga; Ambassador Mr. Moisés Tambini de Valle, Head of the Diplomatic Mission of Peru in Costa Rica; and Minister Gustavo Lembcke and Second Secretary of the Embassy of Peru in Costa Rica Mr. David Tejada.