of this judgment, the Court may determine that the State reimburse the victim or his representative the reasonable expenses that they incur during that procedural stage.201 D. Method of compliance of the payments ordered 199. The State must make the payment of compensation for the pecuniary and nonpecuniary damages and the reimbursement of costs and expenses ordered in this judgment directly to the person indicated therein, within one year of notification of this judgment. 200. If the beneficiary has died or dies before he receives the respective amount, this shall be delivered directly to his heirs, in accordance with the applicable domestic law. 201. The State must comply with the monetary obligations by payment in United States dollars, or its equivalent in the national currency, using the exchange rate of the New York Stock Exchange, the day before the payment. 202. If, for causes that can be attributed to the beneficiary of the compensation or to his heirs, it is not possible to pay the amounts established within the indicated time frame, the State must deposit said amounts in his favor in a bank account or a certificate of deposit in a solvent Argentine financial institution, in United States dollars, and in the most favorable conditions permitted by banking laws and practice. If the corresponding amount is not claimed after ten years, the amounts shall be returned to the State with the interest accrued. 203. The amounts allocated in this judgment as compensation for pecuniary and nonpecuniary damages shall be delivered in full to the person indicated, as established in this judgment, without any deductions arising from possible taxes or charges. 204. If the State should fall in arrears, it shall pay interest on the amount owed, corresponding to the banking interest on arrears in Argentina. VIII. OPERATING PARAGRAPHS 205. Therefore, THE COURT DECLARES, unanimously, that: 1. The State is responsible for violating the right to personal liberty established in Article 7(1), 7(2), 7(3), 7(5) and 7(6) of the American Convention on Human Rights and the right to the presumption of innocence established in Article 8(2) of the same instrument, in relation to the obligation to guarantee rights established in Article 1(1) of the Convention, to the detriment of Raúl Rolando Romero Feris, in the terms of paragraphs 76 to 83 and 87 to 123 of this judgment. 2. The State is not responsible for violating the right to judicial protection established in Cf. Case of Gudiel Álvarez et al. (Diario Militar) v. Guatemala. Interpretation of the Judgment on the Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of August 19, 2013. Series C No. 262, para. 62 and Case of Ruiz Fuentes et al. v. Guatemala. Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of October 10, 2019. Series C No. 385, para. 252. 201 38