51 * * * Non-pecuniary damage The arguments of the next of kin 139. In their brief of March 23, 1999, and during the public hearing (supra 23 and 41), the victim’s next of kin indicated that they had been affected by the treatment that he received and by his death. They therefore requested the amount of Q4,000,000.00 (four million quetzales) as compensation under this heading. The Commission’s arguments 140. In its initial brief, the Commission requested US$100,000.00 (one hundred thousand United States dollars) for the non-pecuniary damage suffered by both the victim and his next of kin. However, in its supplementary brief, the Commission asked that a fair amount should be established, which took into account the information presented by the victim’s next of kin and the evidence submitted by the Commission and that the amount of US$100,000.00 (one hundred thousand United States dollars) requested “should be considered a minimum”. This request was based on the following factors: a) the damage produced by the physical and mental trauma suffered by the victim owing to the abduction, signs of beating, cuts and burns that were present on different parts of his body, including the face, and his subsequent assassination; and b) the psychological suffering and distress that his next of kin experienced owing, on the one hand, to the unsuccessful search for the victim, the abandonment of his body on a path and the subsequent identification, at which time they could observe the severe injuries suffered by the victim and, on the other, to the impunity that followed the events. The State’s arguments 141. The State indicated that, under this heading, it considered the amount of US$10,000.00 (ten thousand United States dollars) to be appropriate; to be given to the “victim’s legal heirs.” The considerations of the Court 142. This Court has already indicated the general criteria that regulate reparation for non-pecuniary damage (supra 104 and 105), and these must taken into consideration also in the case of William Otilio González Rivera. Since he was subjected to aggression and abuse (unlawful detention, torture and death), it is natural that he experienced profound physical and mental suffering, which extends to the closest members of his family, particularly those who had a close affective relationship with the victim. The Court considers that no evidence is required to reach this conclusion