154 Murray, Long, Ayeni and Somé/Monitoring implementation of decisions equate with, proposals made by the African Court itself in consideration of articles 29 and 30 of the Protocol.11 ‘Information-gathering’ is understood to mean receiving or seeking evidence from the parties to the case as well as other actors on what measures States have undertaken to implement the decision or judgment. This may take the form of direct questions to the State delegation during consideration of State reports, holding implementation hearings, correspondence to parties and visits to relevant stakeholders at the domestic level. ‘Reporting’ encompasses informing others, including organs of the AU and other national and international actors, of the measures taken by the State. ‘Dialogue with the parties’ entails that the monitoring body works with the two parties to the communication either through offering ‘good offices’ or facilitating meetings to discuss the implementation of the measures. ‘Interpretation and technical assistance’ is provided when the monitoring body provides further clarification on what the specifics of its recommendations and orders mean. ‘Assessment’ is the evaluation of the extent to which the State has implemented the recommendations or orders. ‘Coordination’ has been used to note that the bodies can also play a role in coordinating efforts to monitor implementation with other bodies at the national or regional level. Examples of ‘enforcement’ tools are: the ‘naming and shaming’ through the publication of lists of States that have failed to implement decisions; Rules 118(1) and (2) of the African Commission’s Rules of Procedure which enable it to refer cases to the African Court when the state has failed to comply;12 or ultimately the ability of the AU organs to impose sanctions on states.13 Here, consequences may flow from the failure to implement. These various forms of monitoring are not always distinct, neither are they mutually exclusive in that they can be undertaken together and at the same time. In addition, for example, undertaking ‘interpretation and technical assistance’ does not 11 See below; and GW Kakai ‘Compliance with supranational human rights judgements and decisions in Sub-Saharan Africa: successes, challenges and opportunities. African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights Experience’, Presentation, Raoul Wallenberg Institute, Closing The Implementation Gap – Strengthening Compliance with Regional Human Rights Decisions Regional Symposium, 27–28 September 2016, Hotel Intercontinental, Nairobi, Kenya, on file with authors. 12 African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights v Great Socialist Peoples’ Arab Jamahiriya, Application 2/2013 para 27. 13 Article 23(2) of the AU Constitutive Act. See African Court Coalition Booklet on the implementation of decisions of the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights (2017) para 2.3.1. See also Rule 33(2) of the Assembly Rules of Procedure (Rules of the Assembly). However, see Rule 36 of the Rules of the Assembly, and counter-argument by GM Wachira & A Ayinla ‘Twenty years of elusive enforcement of the recommendations of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights: a possible remedy’ (2006) 6 African Human Rights Law Journal 465 484.