-2- creation of an effective mechanism for the delimitation, demarcation and titling of said traditional territories, in the terms of paragraphs 209 – 211 of this [J]udgment. 4. The State shall guarantee the safety of those community members who decide to return to Moiwana Village, in the terms of paragraph 212 of this [J]udgment. 5. The State shall establish a community development fund, in the terms of paragraphs 213 – 215 of this [J]udgment. 6. The State shall carry out a public ceremony, whereby Suriname recognizes its international responsibility and issues an apology, in the terms of paragraphs 216 – 217 of this [J]udgment. 7. The State shall build a memorial in a suitable public location, in the terms of paragraph 218 of this [J]udgment. 8. The State shall pay the compensation ordered in paragraph 187 of the instant judgment to the Moiwana community members for material damages, in the terms of paragraphs 178 – 181 and 225 – 231 of this [J]udgment. 9. The State shall pay the compensation ordered in paragraph 196 of the instant judgment to the Moiwana community members for moral damages, in the terms of paragraphs 178 – 181 and 225 – 231 of this [J]udgment. 10. The State shall pay the compensation ordered in paragraph 223 of the instant judgment for costs, in the terms of paragraphs 223 – 231 of this [J]udgment. 11. The Court will monitor compliance with this judgment and will close this case once the State has fully implemented all of the provisions. Within one year of the date of notification of this judgment, the State shall furnish the Court with a report on the measures taken in compliance therewith, in the terms of paragraph 232 of said [J]udgment. 2. The communication dated January 9, 2006, by which the State submitted the names of the persons that will act as members of the Implementation Committee of the Development Fund. 3. The judgment on interpretation of the Moiwana Judgment delivered by the Court on February 8, 2006, in which it: DECIDE[D], Unanimously, 1. To resolve the issues submitted by the State of Suriname and the Representatives, as well as to clarify aspects of the judgment on preliminary objections, merits and reparations of June 15, 2005 in the Case of Moiwana Village set out therein, in the terms of paragraphs 13 through 19 of th[e] decision. 2. To continue to monitor the State’s compliance with the judgment of June 15, 2005 in the Case of Moiwana Village, in the terms of paragraph 232 of said judgment. 4. The brief dated July 14, 2006, in which the State forwarded its first report on the measures taken in compliance with the Judgment and declared that: a) in order to guarantee “an effective and efficient implementation” of the Judgment a number of entities have been created by the State. Those entities have different composition and responsibilities related to the fulfillment of the above-mentioned rulings: a. the Ministerial Coordination Team; b. the Commission of Legal Experts on Human Rights;