31 * * * 64. Based on the Court’s decisions in the Judgment on preliminary objections in the instant case and on paragraphs 57 and 63 of this Judgment, the Court believes that the other claims made by the Inter-American Commission and the representatives of the victim (supra 24) are inadmissible. * * * 65. For all the above reasons, the Court considers that the State violated Articles 8 and 25, in relation to Article 1(1) of the Convention, to the detriment of Mr. José María Cantos. VIII APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 63(1) 66. Based on the facts explained in the preceding chapters, the Court has determined that Articles 8 and 25 of the American Convention were violated, all in relation to Article 1(1) thereof and to the detriment of José María Cantos. The jurisprudence constante of this Court has been that it is a principle of international law that any violation of an international obligation that has caused some damage carries with it the duty to make adequate reparations.108 The Court has relied on Article 63(1) of the American Convention, which provides that: [i]f the Court finds that there has been a violation of a right or freedom protected by this Convention, the Court shall rule that the injured party be ensured the enjoyment of his right or freedom that was violated. It shall also rule, if appropriate, that the consequences of the measure or situation that constituted the breach of such right or freedom be remedied and that fair compensation be paid to the injured party. 67. As the Court has written, Article 63(1) contains a rule of customary law that is one of the fundamental principles of contemporary international law as regards State responsibility. Thus, when an unlawful act is imputed to a State, that State immediately incurs responsibility for violation of the international norm in question and the consequent duty to make reparations and put an end to the consequences of that violation.109 68. As the term implies, reparations are measures intended to erase the effects of the violations committed. Their nature and their amount depend on the damage caused, at both the pecuniary and non-pecuniary levels. Reparations are not meant to enrich or impoverish the victim or his next of kin.110 Every aspect of the obligation to make reparation (scope, nature, modalities, and determination of 108 Cf. El Caracazo Case, Reparations, supra note 5, par. 76; Trujillo Oroza Case, Reparations, supra note 6, par. 60; and Bámaca Velásquez Case, Reparations, supra note 18, par. 38. 109 Cf. Case, supra 110 Cf. Case, supra El Caracazo Case, Reparations, supra note 5, par. 76; Hilaire, Constantine and Benjamin et al. note 5, par. 202; and Trujillo Oroza Case, Reparations, supra note 6, par. 60. El Caracazo Case, Reparations, supra note 5, par. 78; Hilaire, Constantine and Benjamin et al. note 5, par. 205; and Trujillo Oroza Case, Reparations, supra note 6, par. 63.