70 Arguments of the State 167. In this regard, the State indicated that the alleged victim’s reincorporation into her employment would result from the judgment delivered in the trial underway for the crime of terrorism, in which she could be convicted or acquitted. Considerations of the Court Medical and psychological treatment for María Teresa De La Cruz Flores 168. Having examined the arguments of the victim’s representatives and also the body of evidence in the instant case, it is clear that Mrs. De La Cruz Flores’ physical and psychological problems still persist (supra para. 73(54)). Consequently, this Court considers, as it has on other occasions,129 that reparations must also include psychological and medical treatment for the victim. In this regard, the Court considers that the State must provide medical and psychological care to the victim through its health services, including the provision of medication without charge. Reincorporation of María Teresa De la Cruz Flores into her employment and professional updating 169. The Court considers that the State must reincorporate the victim into the activities that, as a physician, she had been performing in public institutions at the time of her detention. She must be reincorporated, at least, at the level she had attained when she was detained. 170. The Court also considers that the State must prove the victim with the possibility of receiving professional training and updating, by awarding her a grant that allows her to take the professional training and updating courses of her choice. 171. The State is also obliged to re-enter the victim on the respective retirement register, with effect retroactive to the date on which she was taken off it, and ensure her the full enjoyment of her right to retirement, in the conditions she had before her detention. Release of María Teresa De la Cruz Flores 172. In relation to the claim of the victim’s representatives that she should be released, the Court observes that the request made by the victim’s defense lawyers during the trial at the domestic level that the detention order be modified was declared admissible on July 8, 2004, by the Fourth Criminal Court for Terrorism (supra para. 73(47)), a decision that was confirmed by the National Terrorism Chamber on September 24, 2004 (supra para. 73(52)). The victim’s current legal status, including the order on conditional appearance issued against her by the Fourth Criminal Court for Terrorism, is a result of the new trial being held before that Court, which is the authority that the defendant’s legal status depends on in this 129 Cf. Case of Tibi, supra note 1, para. 249; Case of Molina Theissen. Reparations (art. 63(1) American Convention on Human Rights). Judgment of July 3, 2004. Series C No. 108, para. 71; Case of Myrna Mack Chang, supra note 105, para. 266; and Case of Bulacio, supra note 107, para. 100