105 lived by that person”. In the instant case, the victim would have enjoyed 25 additional years of life.57 b) Regarding expenses due to the search for Mr. Bámaca Velásquez, the State expressed its willingness to recognize those that “arose from the contingency situation affecting the next of kin”, insofar as they could document them. In this regard, the State pointed out that José León Bámaca Hernández expressed that the household had not suffered any expenses as a consequence of the facts of the case and that Mrs. Harbury had waived reimbursement of said expenses. 49. The State made the following observations on the persons who would have the right to a compensation: a) As regards Mrs. Harbury, the State argued that her marriage with Mr. Bámaca Velásquez had not been registered with the competent Guatemalan authorities, for which reason “an important element of legal certainty has not been fulfilled” and that, in any case, Mrs. Harbury explicitly waived compensation, including the expenses derived from the disappearance of the victim. b) Since it was not proven that the victim provided any financial support to his sisters, the only beneficiary on account of lost income would be his father, José León Bámaca Hernández, because “if Mr. Bámaca Velásquez contributed to his family it should be understood that this contribution was made to his parents”, in accordance with the circumstances of the case and Guatemalan norms regarding succession. Considerations of the Court 50. The Court, taking into account the information it has received during the various stages of the proceedings, the facts considered to be proven in each of these, and its case law, determines that the compensation for pecuniary damages in the instant case must include the items that will be stated in this section. 51. The representatives of the victims and the Inter-American Commission requested a compensation that is to be determined as of March, 1997, when the “Cease fire agreement in Guatemala” was “finally and definitively established”. In this regard, the Court deems it necessary to distinguish two periods: a) 57 the first period goes from March 12, 1992, when Efraín Bámaca Velásquez was captured alive in Nuevo San Carlos, until March, 1997, when the “Peace Accord” entered into force (supra 29.A)c) and d), at which time the victim would presumably have undertaken a work activity in his country. During that period, the victim would have continued to be a guerrilla commander in the URNG. Given the characteristics of that activity, the Court does not deem it appropriate to establish a compensation regarding the income of the victim during that period. The State argued that the life expectancy for the years from 1990 to 1995 was 60 years, according to the Instituto Nacional de Estadística de Guatemala (INE).