12 Case, Reparations, supra 15), considers it fair to award compensation for moral damages caused to the relatives of Isidro Caballero-Delgado in the amount of US$ 20,000.00 (twenty thousand dollars of the United States of America). 51. The Court considers it fair to award compensation for moral damage caused by the death of María del Carmen Santana in the amount of US$ 10,000.00 (ten thousand dollars of the United States of America) to her nearest relative, pursuant to paragraphs 45 and 52(b) of this Judgment. XVI 52. The Court shall now deal with the distribution of the amounts awarded for the various reparations and considers it fair to employ the following criteria: a. The reparation for material and moral damages in the case of Isidro CaballeroDelgado shall be divided as follows: one-third to his son Iván Andrés Caballero-Parra, onethird to his daughter Ingrid Carolina Caballero-Martínez, and one-third to his common-law wife María Nodelia Parra, who shall also be reimbursed for expenses. b. In the case of María del Carmen Santana, the compensation for moral damages shall be awarded to her nearest relative, as indicated in paragraphs 45 and 51 of this Judgment. XVII 53. As regards non-pecuniary reparations, the Commission requested reform of the Colombian legislation on the remedy of habeas corpus and codification of the crime of forced disappearance of persons, and that the judicial proceedings on the disappearance of Isidro Caballero-Delgado and María del Carmen Santana should remain within the jurisdiction of the ordinary courts and not be transferred to the military courts. 54. On the first point, it claims that provision for the remedy of habeas corpus exists in the 1991 Political Constitution of Colombia in exceedingly broad terms, but that Article 430 of the Criminal Code has not been brought into line with the new Constitution or with the American Convention, insofar as it restricts judicial activity to a merely formal ascertainment of the fact that the disappeared person is not in detention. At the public hearing before this Court, the Agent of the Government said that the regulation on habeas corpus was currently to be found in Law 15 of 1992; that the Constitutional Court had declared that law to be consistent with the Political Constitution, and that the Ministry of Justice, together with other governmental bodies, would establish a working group to review that law. He also stated that the National Government had undertaken to enact a law on the forced disappearance of persons. 55. In that connection, the Court observes that in operative paragraph 3 of its Judgment on the merits of December 8, 1995, it was ruled that Colombia had not violated Articles 2, 8 or 25 of the Convention concerning the duty to adopt measures to give effect to the rights and freedoms ensured by the Convention, right to a fair trial and the judicial protection of rights, so that it could not now reopen consideration of that question, which, in any event, had been raised not in the petition, but at the Reparations Stage. At the same time, examination of domestic legislation was not something to be undertaken at the Reparations Stage of a proceeding, in addition to which, since in the instant case it had been impossible to prove that the disappeared persons were being held in any of the official detention establishments, the judicial authorities could not, in the absence of pertinent information as to the disappeared persons' whereabouts, take any measure under the remedy of habeas