argued that such acts of acknowledgement of international responsibility and public apologies are not necessary measures of satisfaction, given that the Court’s judgement per se constitutes a form of reparation. 145. As it has done in other cases, 208 the Court considers that the State should issue the following publications within six months from notification of this judgment: a) the official summary of this judgment prepared by the Court, once, in the Official Gazette in a legible and adequate font size; b) the official summary of this judgment prepared by the Court, once, in a newspaper with wide national circulation in a legible and adequate font size, c) this judgment in its entirety, made available for one year on the websites of the Ministry of Justice and Human Rights, INDECOPI and the Judiciary, in a manner accessible to the public and from the home page of the websites d) an infographic or information booklet on the judgment, in accessible language, available through the social networks of two public institutions designated by the State for that purpose. The State shall immediately inform this Court once it has issued each of the publications ordered, regardless of the one-year term for submitting its first report as ordered in the twelfth operative paragraph of the judgment. 146. In relation to the request for a public act of acknowledgement of responsibility, the Court considers that this judgment, as well as the other measures ordered, are sufficient and adequate to remedy the violations suffered by the victim and does not find it necessary to order this measure of satisfaction. D. Guarantees of non-repetition 147. First of all, the Commission recognized that the State has been adopting crosscutting policies that promote respect, promotion and protection of the rights of LGBTIQ+ people through instruments such as: (i) the National Human Rights Plan, (ii) the National Gender Equality Plan and (iii) the National Plan against Gender Violence. 148. Nevertheless, it recommended that the State adopt the following four measures as guarantees of non-repetition: (i) create and implement a public policy to promote respect for the rights of LGBTIQ+ people in society, through the design and implementation of information and awareness-raising campaigns in the public media; (ii) create or strengthen specialized training programs for all justice operators and State security forces on equality and non-discrimination, gender perspective and the human rights of LGBTIQ+ people; (iii) adopt measures to require, encourage and guide businesses to carry out due diligence in processes for consumer protection related to equality and nondiscrimination of LGBTIQ+ people, and (iv) adopt the measures necessary to promote ratification of the Inter-American Convention Against all Forms of Discrimination and Intolerance. Cf. Case of Cantoral Benavides v. Peru. Reparations and costs. Judgment of December 3, 2001. Series C No. 88, para. 79, and Case of Nissen Pessolani v. Paraguay, supra, para. 115. 208 51