rights established therein. 286 The victim in the present case is Mr. López Mendoza, to which he is the beneficiary of the reparations that the Court orders below. B. Measures of comprehensive reparation: restitution, satisfaction, and guarantees of non-repetition 212. The Court will determine the measures that seek to repair the non-pecuniary damage and that are not pecuniary, and will order measures of a public scope and impact.287 213. International jurisprudence and in particular jurisprudence of the Court, has repeatedly held that the judgment is per se a form of reparation. 288 However, considering the circumstances of the case sub judice, given the damage to Mr. López Mendoza and consequences of a pecuniary or non-pecuniary nature suffered as a result of violations of Articles 8, 23, and 25 of the American Convention, declared to the detriment of the victim, the Court considers it appropriate to establish the following measures. 1. Restitution 214. The Commission requested the Court to order the State “[t]o adopt the necessary measures to reestablish the political rights of Mr. Leopoldo López Mendoza.” 215. For its part, the representatives requested the "[f]ull restitution in the exercise of the political rights of [Mr. López Mendoza] to be elected, according to Article 23 of the Convention [...] in order for him to run as a candidate in elections held in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.” In that sense, they requested that “the decisions for disqualification issued by the Comptroller be dismissed, [...] as well as those decisions made by the different branches of the National Public Power regarding the politicaladministrative disqualifications." In the same vein, they requested the Court to "require the State that the National Electoral Council allow the electoral registration and application of [Mr.] López [Mendoza] for any electoral process to be held in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.” 216. In this regard, the Court notes that in the public hearing in this case, Mr. López Mendoza said that "pursuant to [the] Comptroller General of the Republic" his political rights would be restored "in the year 2014." He added that in that sense, he had hoped to be "release[ed] from [the] restriction [on these] rights [and to] have the ability to freely participate in [the] elections in [his] country." 289 286 Cf. Case of Bayarri V. Argentina, supra note 216, para. 126; Case of Chocrón Chocrón, supra note 13, para. 147, and Case of Mejía Idrovo, supra note 15, para. 130. 287 Cf. Case of the “Street Children” (Villagrán Morales et al) V. Guatemala. Reparations and Costs. Judgment of May 26, 2001. Supra note 282, para. 84; Case of Chocrón Chocrón, supra note 13, para. 148, and Case of Mejía Idrovo, supra note 15, para. 132. 288 Cf. Case of Neira Alegría et al V. Perú. Reparations and Costs, Judgment of September 19, 1996. Series C No. 29, para. 56; Case of Chocrón Chocrón, supra note 13, para. 149, and Case of Mejía Idrovo, supra note 15, para. 134. 289 Statement of Mr. Leopoldo López Mendoza, supra note 214. 79