representative stated that César Alberto Mendoza, Claudio David Núñez, Lucas Matías Mendoza, Saúl Cristian Roldán Cajal and Ricardo David Videla “were not only condemned to suffer a punishment prohibited by international law, but, for many years, were at the mercy of prison authorities who did not observe their international human rights obligations.” She further stressed that the life sentence caused profound non-pecuniary damage to the family unit. Consequently, she asked the Court to order specific amounts as compensation for nonpecuniary damage for each of the said victims, and also for their next of kin. The State indicated that “the pecuniary claim […is] evidently incompatible with the international standards in force.” D.2.2. Considerations of the Court 352. International case law has established repeatedly that the judgment may constitute per se a form of reparation. 412 However, in its own case law, the Court has developed the concept of non-pecuniary damage and established that it may “include both the suffering and distress caused to the direct victims and their families, and the impairment of values that are highly significant to them, as well as other alterations of a non-pecuniary nature that affect the living conditions of the victims or their families.” 413 353. In the instant case, the Court has established the psychological and moral impact on César Alberto Mendoza, Claudio David Núñez, Lucas Matías Mendoza, Saúl Cristian Roldán Cajal and Ricardo David Videla Fernández, and their respective family units (supra paras. 183 and 268), owing to the sentencing to life imprisonment. It has also established the impact on Lucas Matías Mendoza owing to the lack of medical care he suffered while at the Juvenile Institution; the torture suffered by Claudio David Núñez and Lucas Matías Mendoza, and the absence of a serious investigation into these events and into the death of Ricardo Videla. Based on all the foregoing, the Court finds it pertinent to order as compensation for non-pecuniary damage, in favor of César Alberto Mendoza, Claudio David Núñez, Lucas Matías Mendoza, Saúl Cristian Roldán Cajal and Ricardo David Videla Fernández, the amount of US$2,000.00 (two thousand United States dollars) for each of them. It also finds it pertinent to order another US$10,000.00 (ten thousand United States dollars) for Claudio David Núñez and US$30,000.00 (thirty thousand United States dollars) for Lucas Matías Mendoza, owing to the violations additional to the sentencing to life imprisonment that they suffered in this case. 354. The Court has also established in this Judgment the impotence and anguish that the unlawful sentencing of the victims to life imprisonment caused to their families. Therefore, it considers it pertinent to establish, in equity, the following amounts for each of the persons mentioned below: a) US$5,000.00 (five thousand United States dollars) for Isolina del Carmen Herrera, Ana María del Valle Brito, Marta Graciela Olguín, Florinda Rosa Cajal and Stella Maris Fernández, mothers of the said youths; b) US$3,500 (three thousand five hundred United States dollars) for Ricardo Roberto Videla, father of Ricardo David Videla; c) US$3,500 (three thousand five hundred United States dollars) for Elba Mercedes Pajón, grandmother of Lucas Matías Mendoza, and 412 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 Mohamed v. Argentina, para.155. 413 Cf. Case of the “Street Children” (Villagrán Morales et al.) v. Guatemala. Reparations and costs, para. 84, and Case of the Kichwa Indigenous People of Sarayaku v. Ecuador. Merits and reparations. Judgment of June 27, 2012. Series C No. 245, para. 318. 110