15 tenth, there exists no legal obstacle or impossibility at all for the direct application at domestic law level of the international norms of protection, but what is rather required is the will (animus) of the public power (above all the Judiciary) to apply them, amidst the understanding that one will thereby be giving concrete expression to common superior values, consubstantiated in the effective safeguard of human rights; eleventh, once established the international responsibility of a State Party to a human rights treaty, such State has the duty to reestablish the situation which guarantees to the victims the enjoyment of their violated right (restitutio in integrum), putting an end to the situation in breach of that right, as well as, in the light of the case, to provide reparation for the consequences of such violation; twelfth, the modifications in the domestic legal order of a State Party necessary for its harmonization with the norms of a human rights treaty can constitute, in the framework of a concrete case, a form of non-pecuniary reparation under such treaty; and thirteenth, at this beginning of the XXIst century, a reconstruction and renewal of the law of nations (derecho de gentes) as from a necessarily anthropocentric outlook, and no longer a State-centred one as in the past, are required, given the identity of the ultimate objective of both international law and public domestic law as to the full safeguard of the rights of the human person. Antônio A. Cançado Trindade Judge Manuel E. Ventura-Robles Secretary