179. In view of the violations declared in the preceding chapter, the Court will analyze the claims presented by the Commission and by the representative, as well as the arguments of the State, in light of the criteria established in its case law on the nature and scope of the obligation to repair in order to establish measures to redress the harm caused to the victim.194 180. International case law and, particularly, that of the Court have repeatedly established that this judgment is, per se, a form of reparation.195. Nevertheless, in view of the circumstances of this case and the harm that the violations caused to the victim, the Court finds it pertinent to decree other measures. A. Injured party 181. The Court reiterates that, pursuant to Article 63(1) of the Convention, it considers an injured party to be anyone who has been declared a victim of a violation of a right recognized in the Convention. As the victim of the violations declared in Chapter VI.1, the Court considers Raúl Rolando Romero Feris to be an “injured party” and, therefore, the beneficiary of the following orders of the Court. B. Measures of satisfaction and compensation 182. The Commission requested that the State fully redress the human rights violations against Mr. Romero Feris declared in its Report on the Merits, “both materially and immaterially, including fair compensation.” The representative asked that the State be ordered to implement and specify effective public measures that would fully redress the human rights violations of which Mr. Romero Feris was a victim, both in pecuniary and nonpecuniary terms. 183. The State claimed that, under the provisions of Article 63 of the Convention, Mr. Romero Feris did not have the right to reparation since his rights were not violated. B.1. Measures of satisfaction. Publication of the judgment 184. The parties and the Commission did not refer to this measure of reparation. 185. Nonetheless, the Court considers it relevant to order, as it has done in other cases,196 that the State publish, within six months of notification of this judgment: (a) the Court’s official summary of this judgment, once, in the Official Gazette in a legible and adequate font; (b) the Court’s official summary of this judgment, once, in a newspaper of broad national circulation and another of broad circulation in the Province of Corrientes, in a legible and adequate font and (c) the complete judgment, available for at least one year, on an official Web site that is available to the public. 186. The State must immediately inform the Court once it has published each of the above. B.2. Compensation 187. The representative requested that the State be obligated to indemnify Raúl Rolando Romero Feris in the amount of USD 18,000,000.00 (eighteen million United States dollars) for personal, patrimonial, labor, commercial and business damages suffered in addition to the Cf. Case of Andrade Salmón v. Bolivia. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of December 1, 2016. Series C No. 330, para. 189 and Case of Girón et al. v. Guatemala, para. 127. 194 Cf. Case of Neira Alegría et al. v. Peru. Reparations and Costs. Judgment of September 19, 1996. Series C No. 29, para. 56 and Case of Girón et al. v. Guatemala, para. 127. 195 196 Cf. Case of Cantoral Benavides v. Peru, para. 79 and Case of Girón et al. v. Guatemala, para. 132. 35