137 XIV REPARATIONS (Application of Article 63(1) of the American Convention) OBLIGATION TO MAKE REPARATIONS 242. In accordance with the considerations on the merits set forth in the previous chapters, based on the facts in the case, the Court found abridgments of Articles 4(1), 5(1) and 5(2), 7(1) and 7(2), 8(1), 25, 19 and 22(1) of the American Convention, all of them in combination with Article 1(1) of said treaty. The Court has repeatedly pointed out that any violation of an international obligation that has caused damage entails the duty to make adequate reparations.273 To this end, Article 63(1) of the American Convention establishes that: [i]f the Court finds that there has been a violation of a right or freedom protected by this Convention, the Court shall rule that the injured party be ensured the enjoyment of his right or freedom that was violated. It shall also rule, if appropriate, that the consequences of the measure or situation that constituted the breach of such right or freedom be remedied and that fair compensation be paid to the injured party. 243. Said Article reflects a customary rule that is one of the basic principles of contemporary International Law regarding the responsibility of States. Thus, when an unlawful act is attributable to a State, it immediately incurs international responsibility for breaching the international rule involved, and this entails the duty to redress and to make the consequences of the abridgment cease.274 244. Reparation of the damage caused by abridgment of an international obligation requires, whenever possible, full reparation (restitutio in integrum), consisting of reestablishment of the situation prior to the violation. If this is not possible, as in the instant case, the international court must order a series of measures that, in addition to ensuring respect for the rights abridged, will redress the consequences caused by the infringements and order, inter alia, payment of compensation for the damage caused.275 The obligation to make reparations, which is regulated in all aspects (scope, nature, manner, and establishment of the beneficiaries) by International Law, cannot be modified by the State nor can it fail to comply with it by invoking domestic legal provisions.276 245. Reparations consist of measures that seek to make the effects of the violations disappear. Their nature and amount depend on the pecuniary and non- 273 See Case of Acosta Calderón, supra note 7, para. 145; Case of Yatama, supra note 7, para. 230, and Case of the Indigenous Community Yakye Axa, supra note 12, para. 179. 274 See Case of Acosta Calderón, supra note 7, para. 146; Case of Caesar. Judgment of March 11, 2005. Series C No. 123, para. 121, and Case of Huilca Tecse. Judgment of March 3, 2005. Series C No. 121, para. 87. 275 See Case of Acosta Calderón, supra note 7, para 147; Case of Caesar, supra note 274, para. 122, and Case of Huilca Tecse, supra note 274, para. 88. 276 See Case of Acosta Calderón, supra note 7, para 147; Case of the Indigenous Community Yakye Axa, supra note 12, para. 181, and Case of Caesar, supra note 274, para. 122.