19 the reparations stage, the victims. A clear manifestation of the will of the victim’s next of kin in the powers of attorney submitted suffices to constitute sufficient evidentiary material in this international jurisdiction. Thus, regardless of what it is called -power of attorney, letter of attorney, authorization, or any other term-, any document wherein the persons granting the power of attorney express their desire to be represented is sufficient to be legitimate for this Court, which need not conform to the formalities required by domestic laws. Those formalities are not exigible in an international court of human rights (supra 42). 66. The latitude in accepting the representation instruments has, however, certain limits dictated by the use to which the representation will be put. First, the instruments must clearly identify the party bestowing the power of attorney and reflect a lucid and unambiguous manifestation of will. It must also name the person to whom the power of attorney is being given and, finally, indicate in very specific terms the purpose of the representation. In the opinion of this Court, instruments that meet these requirements are valid and have full effect once submitted to the Court. 67. This Court considers that the powers granted on February 19 and May 22, 1998, are valid. The first became effective when the Center for Justice and International Law (CEJIL) and the Instituto de Defense Legal (IDL) represented the victim’s parents and filed the reparations brief. The second power of attorney also became valid inasmuch as the parents ratified everything done under the first power of attorney and because another member of the victim’s family, his sister, Mónica Inés Castillo-Páez, was named as one of the parties granting power of attorney. In this second power of attorney, the three parties granting it named the Center for Justice and International Law (CEJIL), the Instituto de Defensa Legal (IDL), and "Human Rights Watch/Americas" (HRW) as their representatives. Consequently, Human Rights Watch/Americas has been co-representing the victim’s next of kin since May 22, 1998. VII FACTS PROVEN DURING THE REPARATIONS STAGE 68. To determine the reparations called for in the instant case, the Court will rely primarily upon the facts established in the Judgment of November 3, 1997. During this stage of the proceeding, the parties introduced new evidence to demonstrate the existence of certain additional or supervening facts relevant to a determination of reparations. The Court has examined the arguments of the parties and the corresponding evidence and considers the following facts proven: A) Concerning Ernesto Rafael Castillo-Páez: a) He was 22 years old at the time of his detention and subsequent disappearance (cf. the birth certificate of Ernesto Rafael Castillo-Páez); sister b) At the time of his disappearance, he was living with his parents and (Cf. birth certificate and voter registration booklet of Mr. Ernesto Rafael Castillio-Páez; marriage certificate of Cronwell Pierre Castillo-Castillo and