records that exist against the eight victims in relation to the said judgments, and also annul their registration in any type of national or international records that link them to terrorist acts. 2. Measures of rehabilitation: medical and psychological treatment 423. The FIDH asked that “any future medical expenses that the victims and their family members have to incur as a result of the violations of the rights under the Convention be compensated.” It did not indicate any specific amount for this compensation. It indicated that “access to specialized health care services (psychological and physical treatment) for [the victims] and their family unit was required, based on inter-cultural criteria.” It affirmed that, under Chile’s public health care system, “they only receive basic services” and do not have access to mental health care. It alleged that all the victims have suffered from a series of illnesses or physical ailments following their detention, derived mainly from the hunger strikes they undertook, or following their time in hiding during which they “did not have access to professional health care services.” It referred to these physical and mental problems. In addition to this compensation, it requested “the inclusion of all the victims and the members of their family in the Program of Reparation and Comprehensive Care in the Field of Health and Human Rights (PRAIS),” which “would give them preferential access to the public health care system.” 424. Based on the testimony of the victims and on the expert appraisal of psychologist Vargas Forman, the Court has verified that the violations declared in this Judgment had a psychological impact on the victims. Thus, this expert witness concluded that “the symptoms suffered by [the eight victims in this case] fall within the sphere of post-traumatic stress syndrome,” “the symptoms of which are the expression of the contextual events that they have undergone” that have caused them “severe emotional suffering, which has had an impact on their individual functioning and [on] the family dynamics.” She also stated that these symptoms of “emotional suffering arise from the arrest, pre-trial detention, hearings and subsequent sentencing of each one.”412 The victims and also some of their family members referred to specific physical ailments they had suffered as a result of the facts.413 425. The Court finds, as it has in other cases,414 that the State must provide immediately and free of charge, through its specialized health care institutions or personnel, the necessary and appropriate medical and psychological or psychiatric treatment to Segundo Aniceto Norín Catrimán, Víctor Manuel Ancalaf Llaupe, Florencio Jaime Marileo Saravia, Juan Patricio Marileo Saravia, José Benicio Huenchunao Mariñán, Juan Ciriaco Millacheo Licán and Patricia Roxana Troncoso Robles, following their informed consent, including the provision of any medicines they may eventually require, also free of charge, based on the ailments of each of them related to this case; as well as, if appropriate, the transport and other expenses that are strictly necessary and directly related to the medical and psychological treatment. 426. If the State does not have the institutions or personnel who are able to provide the level of care required, it must resort to specialized private institutions or those of civil society. Furthermore, the respective treatment must be provided, insofar as possible, in the centers 412 Cf. Affidavit prepared on May 15, 2013, by expert witness Ruth Elizabeth Vargas Forman (file of statements of presumed victims, witnesses and expert witnesses, folios 374 and 375). 413 Cf. Affidavits prepared on May 14, 2013, by presumed victim Juan Ciriaco Millacheo Licán, by witness Soledad Angélica Millacheo Licán, and by witness Lorenza Saravia Tripaillán; on May 16, 2013, by witness Flora Collonao Millano; on May 17 by presumed victims Juan Patricio Marileo Saravia and José Benicio Huenchunao Mariñán, and written statement made on May 27, 2013, by presumed victim Patricia Roxana Troncoso Robles (file of statements of presumed victims, witnesses and expert witnesses, folios 191, 196 to 198, 208, 215, 216, 233, 247, 248, 650 and 651). 414 Cf. Case of Cantoral Benavides v. Peru. Reparations and costs, paras. 51.d) and e), operative paragraph 8, and Case of J. v. Peru, para. 397. 139