3 Articles 1.1 and 2 of the said instrument, to the detriment of Gretel Artavia Murillo, Miguel Mejía Carballo, Andrea Bianchi Bruno, German Alberto Moreno Valencia, Ana Cristina Castillo León, Enrique Acuña Cartín, Ileana Henchos Bolaños, Miguel Antonio Yamuni Zeledón, Claudia María Carro Maklouf, Víctor Hugo Sanabria León, Karen Espinoza Vindas, Héctor Jiménez Acuña, Maria del Socorro Calderón P., Joaquina Arroyo Fonseca, Geovanni Antonio Vega, Carlos E. Vargas Solórzano, Julieta González Ledezma and Oriester Rojas Carranza. b) The violation of the right established in Article 24 of the American Convention in conection with the obligations established in Articles 1.1 and 2 of the said instrument to the detriment of Gretel Artavia Murillo, Miguel Mejía Carballo, Andrea Bianchi Bruno, German Alberto Moreno Valencia, Ana Cristina Castillo León, Enrique Acuña Cartín, Ileana Henchos Bolaños, Miguel Antonio Yamuni Zeledón, Claudia María Carro Maklouf, Víctor Hugo Sanabria León, Karen Espinoza Vindas, Héctor Jiménez Acuña, Maria del Socorro Calderón P., Joaquina Arroyo Fonseca, Geovanni Antonio Vega, Carlos E. Vargas Solórzano, Julieta González Ledezma and Oriester Rojas Carranza. The Commission is therefore requesting that the Inter-American Court order the following reparations: a) Lift the ban on in vitro fertilization in the country through the necessary legal procedures. b) Ensure that the regulations governing the practice of in vitro fertilization issued once the prohibition is lifted are compatible with the State’s obligations pertaining to the rights recognized in Articles 11.2, 17.2, and 24, as established throughout the report; and especially that the persons and/or couples that so request and desire it may have access to in vitro fertilization techniques, in such a way that said treatment contributes effectively to fulfilling its purpose. c) Make full reparations to the victims in the present case, to include pecuniary and nonpecuniary damages and measures of satisfaction for the harm done. In addition to the need to get justice for the victims in the instant case, the IACHR observes that this case raises issues of inter-American ordre public. The victims in the instant case are not the only ones affected by the general ban on the practice of in vitro fertilization in Costa Rica. The ban has raised the question of the scope and content of the rights recognized in articles 11 and 17 of the American Convention. Specifically, the instant case is an opportunity for the Court to examine the protection of the right to found a family, in the sense of deciding to become a biological parent and then having access to the means necessary for that right to be exercised. The Court will also be able to declare that the decision to found a family is one of the most private decisions that an individual and/or couple makes and is the exclusive purview of each individual and/or couple. As this case directly concerns the scope and content of Convention articles 11 and 17, it necessitates a juridical analysis of the international standards that must be taken into account when examining permissible restrictions on the exercise of the right to a private and family life and the right to found a family, in a