107. The Court is further of the opinion that such a measure hardly amounts to contempt of Burkinabé investigations legislation, since after the matter all it does had been is to offer dismissed the possibility by the national of reopening court for lack of evidence; and the Respondent State itself is disposed to the reopening of investigations into the matter (supra, para. 102). 108. The Court would also like to emphasize that whereas it may indeed order the State to adopt certain measures, the Court does not however deem it necessary to indicate to the State how it should comply with the Court's decision, that being left to the discretion of the said State. 109. Based on the foregoing considerations, the Court grants the Applicants’ request to order the Respondent State to reopen investigations with a view to prosecute and bring to trial the perpetrators of the murder of Norbert Zongo and his three companions, and thus shed light on this matter and do justice to the families of the victims. 110. On the Applicant's request to require the Respondent State to furnish all information concerning the measures taken in this respect within six months, the Court is of the opinion that it is not necessary to set a specific time limit for implementation of the measures in question, considering that it will determine later (infra, para 111) the time limit within which the Respondent State should notify the Court of its execution of all the measures it would have taken in the instant case. 111. For these reasons, THE COURT: (i) Unanimously Decides, with regard to the moral prejudice suffered by the Applicants natural persons in the instant case, that only the spouse, the sons and daughters, and the fathers and mothers of the deceased persons mentioned in paragraph 50 of this Judgment are entitled to reparation; (ii) Unanimously