11 obtain their identification cards [and]; in some cases, the persons identified in the [J]udgment as beneficiaries had died and so their family had to […]” commence the relevant succession proceedings for determination of heirs. As a result, they did not receive the first payment “[…] until the second payment was made.” In addition, the State pointed out that “[…] at the request of the Court […], the complete list of 273 beneficiaries [wa]s submitted, in which the 269 beneficiaries mentioned in the State report of October 31, 2007 [were] included, including 7 payments made as a result of intestacy proceedings plus the payments made subsequently […].” Finally, Guatemala reported that it had made the first payment of 33.33% of the amount specified in the Judgment to the representatives for costs and expenses “[…] with the exception of the interest thereon […]” given that they had waived such payment (supra Having Seen clause No. 2). 44. That the State informed that, on December 18, 2006, the second payment was made, […] amounting to 33.33% of the total amount ordered by the Court to 252 […] surviving victims […] as well as accrued interest thereon […].” On February, 2007, the State remitted two records including the persons who received the payment on December 18, 2006 and five additional records of the payments made on February 2, 2007 pursuant to the relevant succession proceedings, which total 259 records. In addition, the State made the second payment of 33.33% of the amount specified in the Judgment for costs and expenses to the representatives (supra Having Seen clause No. 2). 45. That the representatives indicated that “as established by the State, Guatemala has made the second payment amounting to 33.33% of the total amount of the compensation awarded, [as well as] accrued interest thereon, in accordance with the information provided by the State itself.” Furthermore, the representatives stated that they had received the second payment of costs and expenses. Finally, they recognized the efforts made by the State to comply with the aforesaid operative paragraphs. However, they stressed the need for systematic information “[…] indicating the name of the persons who have received the first and second payment[s] (including interest) and the supporting [r]ecord [n]umber” (supra Having Seen clause No. 3). 46. That, in relation to the compensation and the reimbursement of costs and expenses, the Commission indicated that it seemed that an agreement had been reached for the State to make such payment in three installments. The Commission added that “[…] the representatives confirmed that they received the payment made […].” In addition, it “[…] appreciate[d] the State’s compliance with the agreed-upon payments and reiterate[d] its satisfaction with the efforts made by Guatemala […]” to provide assistance to the victims. The Commission also noted that the State had not yet submitted detailed information regarding the payments to direct victims who had died and to those who are in the country but do not have representation. It also stressed the need to ensure prompt and effective implementation of the reparation measures ordered by the Court. In addition, the Commission emphasized the importance of the measures adopted by the State to ensure compliance with said operative paragraphs and noted that “[…] for the purpose of monitoring compliance, the State should […] provide systematic information regarding the beneficiaries of the payments made up to [that] point […] as well as information about the steps undertaken to ensure that the beneficiaries of the compensation awarded are identified, located, and effectively receive the reparations to which they are entitled. Finally, it pointed out that information must be provided concerning whether the State has deposited the relevant amount with a banking institution in order to pay the beneficiaries who have not yet claimed their compensation, in accordance with the