the delivery of this judgment, together with the other measures ordered, are sufficient and adequate to redress the violations suffered by the victims and does not find it necessary to order additional measures. E. Compensation e.1 Pecuniary damage 236. The Commission asked that the State make full reparation to Mr. Ruiz Fuentes for the harm caused by measures of compensation and satisfaction, which included both pecuniary and nonpecuniary damages. 237. The representatives asked the Court to determine, in equity, an amount for pecuniary damage. The representatives explained that the victims in this case had assumed diverse expenses owing to the violations of their rights. First, Mr. Ruiz Fuentes had initially been assisted by a private lawyer, who acted negligently, so that he was then assigned another defense counsel. They added that his family had had to pay numerous expenses, including especially the transfers to visit him when he was detained. Following his death, they incurred expenses for his funeral and, subsequently, they were one of the main promoters of the search for justice. The representatives indicated that, owing to the passage time, the victims did not have vouchers for the said expenses; therefore, they asked the Court to determine, in equity, a sum for pecuniary damage that should be delivered to each of them. 238. The representatives also indicated that Mr. Ruiz Fuentes had been deprived of his liberty in an unlawful and arbitrary manner, tortured and sentenced to death following proceedings that violated his rights. In addition, he was subsequently executed by state agents. Accordingly, the violation of the victim’s rights deprived his family of the income that he would have received if these violations had not occurred. The representatives indicated that, before his arrest in 1997, Hugo Humberto worked in a car repair shop. They considered that the State should reimburse the victim’s unpaid wages from the time of his arrest to date. The representatives asked the Court to establish this sum, in equity. 239. The State indicated that Mr. Ruiz Fuentes was engaged in unlawful acts through which he sought to obtain an income illegally and to the detriment of other persons. Regarding the services provided by a private professional, the State considered that this person had the right and freedom to decide who he wished to defend. Neither the family members nor their representatives had ever provided reliable proof of the expenses incurred during the litigation of this case. Consequently, the State asked the Court to declare the request inadmissible. The State also indicated that abduction or kidnapping is a crime and not a job and, therefore, it could never engage itself to reimburse the sum of one million quetzals requested by Mr. Ruiz Fuentes as a “salary” for the rescue of the child. The State also indicated that no evidence had been provided to the case file that allowed it to be determined that Mr. Ruiz Fuentes had an income or earnings from some licit activity. e.2 Non-pecuniary damage 240. The Commission asked that Mr. Ruiz Fuentes receive full reparation including measures of satisfaction and monetary compensation for the pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage caused. 241. The representatives indicated that, owing to the facts of this case, the violations committed, the suffering caused, the effects on life projects, and the other non-pecuniary consequences suffered by the victims in this case, the Court should order the State of Guatemala to pay non-pecuniary damage based on the equity principle. 242. The State indicated that the parties who were prejudiced in this case were the kidnapped child 52