258. The Court considers that the Judgment constitutes per se a form of reparation, and therefore, in this case, does not consider it appropriate to order the measure requested. 259. The representatives requested that the Court order the State to “erect a symbolic monument in the city of Coro, in the State of Falcón, to serve as a reminder of the grave human rights violations committed in that State.” The State expressed its opposition to the construction of symbolic monuments, considering this action as “reviving memories of people who have committed criminal acts, especially in cities in the country’s interior. Since Venezuela has a small population, all its inhabitants know each other.” 260. The Court, considering that the reparations ordered in this section are sufficient to repair the violations, does not consider it necessary to order said measure. C.3. Guarantees of non-repetition. 261. The Commission recommended that the State: a) “strengthen institutional capacity to fight the pattern of impunity in cases of extrajudicial executions, through effective criminal investigations with consistent judicial follow-up, thereby guaranteeing appropriate punishment and reparation;” b) “[s]trengthen institutional capacity to combat the pattern of impunity in cases of threats and deaths of relatives and their defenders for seeking justice, and through the design of investigation protocols that take into consideration the risks inherent to each activity, and that lead to the punishment of those responsible and to adequate reparation of the victims;” c) “impart training courses for members of police and military forces on human rights issues and on the special status of children, in the exercise of public security duties”; d) “adopt all legal, administrative and other measures […]necessary to guarantee that when Police Forces apply lethal force, they do so in accordance with the obligations stemming from the duties to protect and guarantee the fundamental rights acknowledged by the American Convention,” and to establish and apply “effective protocols for the implementation of adequate monitoring and accountability mechanisms regarding the actions of said officers,” and e) “reform, within a reasonable time period, the definition of the crimes of libel and slander, according to international standards, thereby guaranteeing the right to freedom of expression; and that the standards of the Inter-American system for the protection of the freedom of expression be respected both in legislative reforms and in the administrative or judicial proceedings carried out in accordance with current legislation.” 262. The representatives requested that the Court order the State to: a) "[a]dopt a mechanism for registering detainees that is public and accessible in the places where people are detained before being brought before a competent judge”; b) [c]reate the General Police Commission;” c) [c]reate a unified, public and accessible database for complaints concerning human rights violations committed by security forces of the State of Venezuela;” d) “[t]rain officials of the Criminology Unit of the Public Prosecutors’ Office;”; e) “[a]dapt the protocols on due diligence in investigations to international standards;” f) “[a]dapt rules on the disproportionate use of force and firearms to international standards;” g) ““[t]rain security forces on the exceptional use of lethal force and the prohibition of torture,” and h) “[a]dequately implement legislation for the protection of witnesses in Venezuela.” 263. The State held that its Constitution requires it to train the institutions responsible for public security,293 and that therefore the Attorney General’s Office, 293 Cf. Constitution of Venezuela, Chapter IV, Article 332 (Merits file, volume 2, pages 370 and 371). 64