46 192. As it has in other cases,131 and considering the State’s acceptance in this regard (supra para. 31), the Court considers that, as a measure of satisfaction, the State must publish once in the Official Gazette and in another national newspaper with widespread coverage, chapters VII to X of this judgment, without the corresponding footnotes, and its operative paragraphs. These publications must be made within six months of notification of this Judgment. iii) Public act acknowledging international responsibility 193. As it has in other cases,132 the Court considers it necessary, in order to repair the damage caused to the victims and their next of kin and to avoid a repetition of facts such as those of this case, that the State conduct a public act acknowledging its international responsibility in relation to the violations declared in this judgment, to make reparation to the victims and to provide satisfaction to their next of kin. During this act, reference must be made to the activities of Saúl Cantoral-Huamaní and Consuelo García-Santa Cruz, and also to the human rights violations declared in this judgment. The act must take place in a public ceremony, in the presence of authorities representing the State and the next of kin who have been declared victims in this judgment, who must be invited by the State with due notice. The State must publicize this act in the media.133 The act must be carried out within six months of notification of this Judgment. iv) Scholarships for Education 194. Taking into consideration the request made by the representatives and, as the Court has ordered in other cases,134 the State must provide a scholarship in a public Peruvian institution for the children of Saúl Cantoral-Huamaní, covering all the costs of their education, from the time the beneficiaries request the State to provide it until the conclusion of their advanced technical or university studies. The State must also provide a scholarship, under the same conditions, for professional training or updating for Ulises Cantoral-Huamaní and Pelagia Mélida Contreras-Montoya de Cantoral. v) Medical and psychological care 195. In accordance with the statements made and the expert opinion provided in these proceedings, the facts of this case have affected physically and mentally the next of kin who have been declared victims in this judgment. In his expert psychological report, the expert witness Gushiken Miyagui referred to the need for these next of kin to receive medical and psychological treatment.135 196. When examining the situation of Pelagia Mélida Contreras-Montoya de Cantoral, Saúl Cantoral Huamaní’s wife, the expert’s report indicated that the efforts of Mrs. Contreras to overcome the death of her husband have been insufficient and that she had been in crisis in recent months. In this regard, the expert stated that “when Saul’s death is mentioned, she 131 Cf. Case of Bueno-Alves v. Argentina, supra note 8, para. 215; Case of La Cantuta v. Peru, supra note 8, para. 237; and Case of Goiburú et al. v. Paraguay, supra note 72, para. 175. 132 Cf. Case of La Cantuta v. Peru, supra note 8 para. 235; Case of the Miguel Castro-Castro Prison v. Peru, supra note 6, para. 445; and Case of Vargas-Areco v. Paraguay, supra note 6, para. 158. 133 Cf. Case of the Miguel Castro-Castro Prison v. Peru, supra note 6, para. 445; Case of the Girls Yean and Bosico v. Dominican Republic. Judgment of September 8, 2005. Series C No. 130, para. 235; and the case of the Yakye Axa Indigenous Community. Judgment of June 17, 2005. Series C No. 125, para. 226. 134 Cf. Case of Gómez-Palomino v. Peru, supra note 65, para. 148; and Case of the Gómez-Paquiyauri Brothers v. Peru, supra note 6, para. 237. 135 Cf. Expert psychological report provided by Roberto Alfonso Gushiken-Miyagui on January 11, 2007 (file of preliminary exception, merits, reparations and costs pages 426 to 442).