72 labeling and stigmatizing toward the victims and families, who live spread throughout the country’s interior, has been recorded, and the existence of violent means for conflict resolution was detected through the impunity of the situation, community divisions regarding the execution of reparation measures in [L]as Cruces, and communication systems based on misinformation and rumors.” 267 The effect of this type of measures thus contributes to the knowledge of the facts, vindication of the families, and preserving the memories of their loved ones. 260. The Court values the fact that the State has made public its recognition of international responsibility of April 1, 2000 on several occasions, however this recognition does not comprise all of the facts of the instant case, which the Court has examined as of March 9, 1987, nor the juridical consequences derived from them. 261. In order for the States’ partial recognition of responsibility performed before the Court to have its full effects, as a guarantee of non-repetition of the grave human rights violations declared, the Court considers appropriate for the State to perform a public act of recognition of international responsibility. In this act, reference must be made to: a) the facts of the massacre and b) the facts of the instant case and the human rights violations declared in the instant Judgment, against 155 victims, two of which are survivors of the massacre.268 262. The performance and specifics of this public ceremony must be held, to the extent possible, with the victims’ agreement and cooperation, if they so desire. Additionally, it must be guaranteed that the victims who have the possibility of going to the event do so, for which the State must cover their transport expenses. Likewise, due to the specific characteristics of the instant case, and with the goal of creating awareness of the consequences of the facts of the case, high representatives of the State and Judges of the Supreme Court of Justice and the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Guatemala must be present at this event. 263. Regarding the documentary video on the facts of the Massacre of the Las Dos Erres Community, which the State already created, the Court considers that it must be shown during the public ceremony. Additionally, the State must show the video at a public act in the capital of Petén and in a department of the western area in which grave human rights violations occurred during the internal armed conflict. High representatives of the Department and Municipalities must be present at these events. These acts must be organized with the participation of the victims or their representatives. Additionally, the video must be distributed as widely as possible among the victims, the representatives, and the universities in the country, for its promotion and subsequent showing. 264. To perform these acts, the State has one year as of the date of notification of this Judgment. c) Construction of a monument 265. The Court deems it pertinent to order the Court to build a monument in memory of those deceased during the massacre of Las Dos Erres community, at the place where the facts occurred. This monument must bear a plate which refers to the massacre and provides the name of those individuals, so as to preserve their 267 268 Expert opinion of Nieves Gómez Dupuis, supra note 266, f. 628. Cf. Case of the Ituango Massacres v. Colombia, supra note 17, para. 406; Case of Cantoral Huamaní and García Santa Cruz v. Peru. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of July 10, 2007. Series C No. 167, para. 193, and Case of Kawas Fernández v. Honduras, supra note 21, para. 202.