65 release because such a preventive measure is for the competent domestic court to adopt. 222. In an earlier case, the Court held that the State is obliged in accordance with the general duties to respect rights and adopt provisions under domestic law (Article 1(1) and (2) of the Convention), to adopt such measures as may be necessary to ensure that violations such as those established in the instance case never again occur in its jurisdiction.113 This Court also found that domestic laws that place civilians under the jurisdiction of the military courts are a violation of the principles of the American Convention. Therefore, the State is to adopt the appropriate measures to amend those laws and ensure the enjoyment of the rights recognized in the Convention to all persons within its jurisdiction, without exception.114 223. As for the Commission’s request that the victims be compensated, the Court considers that the State must pay the expenses and costs that the victims’ relatives incurred by reason of these proceedings. To that end, based on principles of equity, the Court estimates those costs and expenses to be a total of US$10,000.00 (ten thousand United States dollars), or its equivalent in Peru’s national currency. Consequently, each of the four family groups concerned would receive US$2,500.00 (two thousand five hundred United States dollars). 224. For execution of the order of the Court set out in the preceding paragraph, the Court shall call upon the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights to determine which relatives of the victims incurred expenses and costs in connection with these proceedings and to so inform the State so that it might disburse the corresponding payments. 225. As for other forms of compensation, the Court considers that the present judgment is in itself a meaningful and important form of compensation and moral satisfaction for the victims and their relatives.115 XVII OPERATIVE PARAGRAPHS 226. Now therefore, THE COURT Unanimously 1. Finds that in the instant case, the State did not violate Article 20 of the American Convention on Human Rights. Unanimously 113. Suárez Rosero Case, supra note 80, para. 106. 114. Suárez Rosero Case, supra note 80, para. 87. 115. Suárez Rosero Case, Reparations, supra note 17, para. 72.