44 210. First, the Court considers that this Judgment is per se a means of reparation;159 it shall be understood as a measure intended to satisfy, and that recognizes that the rights of Mr. Usón Ramírez, the subject of this case, have been violated by the State. B.2) Leaving without effect the criminal trial in the military jurisdiction against Mr. Usón Ramírez 211. The Commission requested the Court to order the State to adopt “all judicial and administrative measures as well as any other type of measures to leave without effect the military criminal trial instituted against the victim, including its judgments[.] [Likewise, it requested] deleting the criminal record from the corresponding registry and any implications whatsoever. [To that end, the Commission indicated] that the State must take all the necessary measures so that Mr. Usón Ramírez can enjoy his personal liberty[, as soon as possible], without undue direct or indirect conditions” or restrictions and hindrances. 212. In turn, the representatives requested that “all the effects of the military criminal trial against Francisco Usón be annulled, eliminating said judgment from his criminal record.” Similarly, the representatives requested that the following shall be returned to Mr. Usón: i) “his right to full exercise of his freedom of expression, without further restrictions other than the ones that the State may lawfully adopt pursuant to Article 13(2) of the Convention and under a general law;” ii) “full exercise of his personal liberty, without any restriction or conditions whatsoever,” and iii) “all his political rights, including the right to demonstrate and the right to meet.” 213. The Court has determined that the criminal trial carried out under the military criminal jurisdiction against Mr. Usón Ramírez did not offer the necessary judicial guarantees in a democratic State respecting the right of the natural judge and the due process and that criminal action was not suitable or necessary in this case (supra paras. 68,75, and 86 to 88). Therefore, given the characteristics of this case, as done on previous occasions,160 the Court considers that the State must, within a period of one year, adopt all the judicial and administrative measures and any other necessary measures to leave without effect the military criminal trial instituted against Mr. Usón Ramírez for the facts declared in this Judgment. To comply with this measure of reparation, the State must ensure, inter alia, that the guilty verdict is left without effect, that his criminal record is deleted from the corresponding public registry, and assure that Mr. Usón Ramírez can enjoy his personal liberty without the conditions that were imposed on him (supra paras. 98 to 100). Furthermore, Mr. Usón Ramírez shall not be the object of another trial, either civil, criminal, or administrative, for the facts in this case. B.3) Adapting the domestic law to international standards regarding contempt and military criminal jurisdiction 214. The Commission also indicated that “the State has the obligation to prevent any recurrence of violations of human rights such as in [this case. C]onsequently, the Commission requested the Court to order the Venezuelan State to adapt its legislation to the rights set forth in Articles 13, 7, 8, and 25 of the American Convention.” 159 Cf. Case of Neira Alegría et al.v. Peru. Reparations and Costs. Judgment of September 19, 1996. Series C No. 29, para. 56; Case of DaCosta Cadogan, supra note 9, para. 100, and Case of Garibaldi, supra note 11, para. 193. 160 Cf. Case of Suárez Rosero v. Ecuador. Reparations and Costs. Judgment of January 20, 1999. Series C No. 44, para. 76; Case of Tristán Donoso, supra note 38, para. 195, and Case of Bayarri, supra note 43, para. 180.