6 15. The representatives stated that the State effectively "made a proposal to cut down the content of the publication" ordered by the Court. They indicated that they were not obliged to accept this proposal because it reduced the obligations imposed upon the State. According to the representatives, the Colombian State "made a publication in the El Espectador newspaper on Sunday 26 September [2010] and they [were] informed via a written communication sent by fax on Friday the 24th [of the same month and year] at 5:34 pm [...], a time at which it is often virtually impossible that an official at the Directorate of Human Rights and IHL is available in an emergency. They deem[ed] this to be an unfair way to treat the victims and their representatives." As a result, they manifested that the family of Jesús María Valle Jaramillo, the other victims set forth in the Judgment, representatives and the human rights community did not find out about the aforementioned publication in a timely fashion. Finally, the representatives noted that the State has not published any domestic decision and thus fails to comply with the Judgment of the Court. 16. The Commission positively valued the publication made by the State in the Official Gazette and considered that the State has partially complied with this aspect of the Judgment. Moreover, the Commission asked the Court to request a copy of the publication made in a nationally circulated newspaper so as to fully comply with this point. 17. The President positively values the State's efforts aimed at implementing operative paragraph fifteen of the Judgment. Indeed, the available information indicates that the publication of the paragraphs of the Judgment in the Official Gazette had been complied with, as the parties agree with regard to partial compliance of this point. Therefore, this matter will be referred to the Court so that it can consider the compliance at an appropriate time. 18. As for the publication in a nationally circulated newspaper, it is imperative that the State submit a copy of the publication that the representatives referred to, and that the Commission submits its observations. a) Regarding operative paragraph sixteen of the Judgment 19. Regarding the obligation to hold a public ceremony to acknowledge international responsibility, at the University of Antioquia, in relation to the violations found in the case (sixteenth operative paragraph of the Judgment), the State did not refer specifically to this point, but expressed its willingness to comply as soon as possible with all the measures ordered by this Court, hence it stated that it is currently taking the necessary steps to achieve this goal. Consequently, it manifested that it will inform this Court on all diligences taken relating to said measure. 20. The representatives stated that together with the family of Jesús María Valle Jaramillo, they have "considered that public [c]eremony held within the University of Antioquia must include the active and positive participation of all the university population." They also noted the existence of a "consensus among the student representatives, [from differing disciplines], who participated, with regard to the need to work [...] so that any event that is held be carried out without interference or hindrance of any kind." Consequently, they proposed several conceptual elements for the ceremony to the State, as well as possible mechanisms to ensure its success, and await the State response.