9 complete and more current information on its actions with regard to these operative paragraphs; f) The State had taken some steps at the domestic level towards making the payment. Nevertheless, it considered that the information provided was insufficient to identify a timetable regarding each of the different measures of compensation. In addition, the Commission indicated that this payment continued to be pending and, bearing in mind that the payments had not been made within the allotted time of one year, when paid, they should be increased by interest on arrears; g) Neither the State nor the representatives had referred to compliance with the measures necessary to safeguard the life, integrity and security of Dirma Montserrat Peña, Pedro Iván Peña and Raúl Esteban Portillo. Hence, the Commission considered that it was pertinent to require the State to provide information on the measures adopted to comply with this obligation, and h) In general, the Commission considered that, although the State had taken some administrative measures to comply with the operative paragraphs of the judgment, only one of these decisions had been complied with completely. Thus, the State had not adopted the necessary or appropriate actions to comply with most of the obligations emanating from the judgment. Hence, the Commission requested the Court to require the State: i. ii. iii. iv. To provide clarification about compliance with providing a place for the final burial of the son of María Teresa Jesús Pérez; To comply fully with its obligation to provide medical and psychological treatment, especially and promptly to the victims who, being deprived of their liberty or without financial resources, require medical care owing to the seriousness of their ailments; To submit information to help determine whether it has complied with its obligation to create a program of special education program and a vocational program; To comply with its obligation to pay compensation, costs and expenses, as well as with regard to the interest on arrears to be paid to the victim, owing to the time that has elapsed without the corresponding payment having been made. Lastly, it requested that the State should be required to provide complete information on the measures adopted to safeguard the life, integrity and security of Dirma Montserrat Peña, Pedro Iván Peña and Raúl Esteban Portillo. In view of the foregoing, it requested that a time limited be established for the State to report on effective compliance measures, and that the Court continue to monitor compliance with judgment with regard to all the obligations that remain pending. 9. The brief of June 7, 2006, in which Eduardo Vera, one of the victims, through Raquel Talavera, representative of the victims, submitted a brief in which he reported on “the situation of those who were and [allegedly continue] to be victims of the State, […] which [allegedly] is not complying with the judgment delivered by the Court.” In addition, he requested that he “should be provided with provisional measures to protect [his] life and physical integrity because he had sent [this] communication.”