53 Shaw Arrivillaga, Ricardo San Pedro Suárez, Jorge Carpio Arrivillaga, Rodrigo Carpio Arrivillaga, Karen Fischer, Rodrigo Carpio Fischer, Daniela Carpio Fischer, Silvia Arrivillaga de Villacorta, Álvaro Martín Villacorta Arrivillaga, Silvia Piedad Villacorta Arrivillaga, Juan Carlos Villacorta Arrivillaga, María Isabel Villacorta Arrivillaga, José Arturo Villacorta Arrivillaga, Rosa Everilda Mansilla Pineda, Lisbeth Azucena Rivas Mansilla, Dalia Yaneth Rivas Mansilla, César Aníbal Rivas Mansilla, Nixon Rigoberto Rivas Mansilla, Sonia Lisbeth Hernández Saraccine, Alejandro Ávila Hernández, Sydney Roberto Ávila Hernández, María Paula González Chamo and María Nohemi Guzmán; c) 5(2) (Right to Humane Treatment), to the detriment of Sydney Shaw Díaz, Martha Arrivillaga de Carpio, Sydney Shaw Arrivillaga, Mario Arturo López Arrivillaga and Ricardo San Pedro Suárez; d) 19 (Rights of the Child), to the detriment of Sydney Shaw Díaz, who was a minor at the time; e) 13(1), 13(2)(a), and 13(3) (Freedom of Thought and Expression), to the detriment of Mr. Carpio Nicolle; f) 8(1) (Right to a Fair Trial) and 25 (Right to Judicial Protection), to the detriment of Sydney Shaw Díaz, Martha Arrivillaga de Carpio, Mario Arturo López Arrivillaga, Sydney Shaw Arrivillaga, Ricardo San Pedro Suárez, Jorge Carpio Arrivillaga, Rodrigo Carpio Arrivillaga, Karen Fischer, Rodrigo Carpio Fischer, Daniela Carpio Fischer, Silvia Arrivillaga de Villacorta, Álvaro Martín Villacorta Arrivillaga, Silvia Piedad Villacorta Arrivillaga, Juan Carlos Villacorta Arrivillaga, María Isabel Villacorta Arrivillaga, José Arturo Villacorta Arrivillaga, Rosa Everilda Mansilla Pineda, Lisbeth Azucena Rivas Mansilla, Dalia Yaneth Rivas Mansilla, César Aníbal Rivas Mansilla, Nixon Rigoberto Rivas Mansilla, Sonia Lisbeth Hernández Saraccine, Alejandro Ávila Hernández, Sydney Roberto Ávila Hernández, María Paula González Chamo and María Nohemi Guzmán; and g) 23(1)(a), (b) and (c) (Right to Participate in Government), to the detriment of Mr. Carpio Nicolle. 83. In accordance with its order of July 5, 2004 (supra para. 80), the Court will proceed to determine the scope and amount of the reparations and costs. 84. The Court considers that the State’s acknowledgment of international responsibility constitutes, once again, a positive contribution to the development of this proceeding and to respect for the principles that inspire the American Convention. IX REPARATIONS APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 63(1) OF THE AMERICAN CONVENTION OBLIGATION TO REPAIR