In this paper we focus on the formalization of the proof of equivalence between different versions of Euclid's 5 th postulate. This postulate is of historical importance because for centuries many mathematicians believed that this statement was rather a theorem which could be derived from the first four of Euclid's postulates and history is rich of incorrect proofs of Euclid's 5 th postulate. These proofs are incorrect because they assume more or less implicitly a statement which is equivalent to Euclid's 5 th postulate and whose validity is taken for granted. Even though these proofs are incorrect the attempt was not pointless because the flawed proof can be turned into a proof that the unjustified statement implies the parallel postulate. In this paper we provide formal proofs verified using the Coq proof assistant that 10 different statements are equivalent to Euclid's 5 th postulate. We work in the context of Tarski's neutral geometry without continuity nor Archimedes' axiom. The formalization provide a clarification of the hypotheses used for the proofs. Following Beeson, we study the impact of the choice of a particular version of the parallel postulate on the decidability issues.