2 2. The Court’s Ruling of November 27, 2003 on the compliance with judgment in the present case, in which it stated in its seventh and eighth whereas clauses that: 7. […] when supervising the comprehensive compliance of the judgments on merits and reparations issued in the present case, and after analyzing the information provided by the State, the victims, and the Inter-American Commission, the Court […] prove[d] that the State ha[d] paid the compensations for costs and expenses to the victims ordered by the Tribunal, pursuant to the sixth operative paragraph of the Judgment on reparations. 8. […] after analyzing the information provided by the State, the victims, and the Inter-American Commission, the Tribunal consider[ed] it was indispensable that the State inform the Court regarding the compliance of the following: a) on the result of the investigations to determine the people responsible for the violations of the human rights committed against the victims of the case and their punishment […] (Fourth operative paragraph of the Judgment of November 27, 2003); and b) on the payment of the arrears of salary and other benefits that, by domestic law, correspond to Messrs. Manuel Aguirre Roca, Guillermo Rey Terry, and Delia Revoredo Marsano (Fifth operative paragraph of the Judgment of November 27, 2003). In this sense, the Tribunal decided to: 3. Urge the State to adopt all the measures necessary to give effect and prompt compliance to the reparations ordered in the Judgment of January 31, 2001 and that whose compliance was still pending, pursuant to that stated in Article 68(1) of the American Convention on Human Rights. 3. The Court’s Ruling of November 17, 2004 on the compliance with judgment in the present case, in which it stated in its eighth and ninth whereas clauses that: 8. […] when supervising the comprehensive compliance of the Judgment of January 31, 2001, and after analyzing the information provided by the State, the victims, and the Commission in its briefs on the compliance with the reparations […] the Tribunal warn[ed] that it did not have enough information on the following matters pending of compliance: a) the current status of the investigations to determine the people responsible for the violations of the human rights committed against the victims of the case and their punishment […] (Fourth operative paragraph of the Judgment of January 31, 2001); and b) the payment of the arrears of salary and other benefits that, by domestic law, correspond to Messrs. Manuel Aguirre Roca, Guillermo Rey Terry, and Delia Revoredo Marsano (Fifth operative paragraph of the Judgment of January 31, 2001). 9. […] this Court […] establish[ed] that the State responsible that incurs in a delay regarding payment of the compensations ordered by the Tribunal must […] pay an interest over the amount due. It is an obligation of the State responsible to comply with payment of the compensations ordered by the Tribunal in its judgments within the time period established for said payment, and failure to comply with this obligation brings about consequences for the State. When payment is made after the time period has expired, the consequent obligation to pay interests over the amounts due arises for the State, thus, maintaining the value of the compensation and ensuring that said amounts maintain the purchasing power. The Court […] declare[d] that the States have the mentioned obligation to pay interests even when in the judgment in which the Tribunal stated the reparations it did not establish said obligation expressly. In this sense, the Tribunal decided to: