50 180. The Commission alleged that in the present case it is evident that the next of kin of Ramón Mauricio García Prieto have suffered psychological pain, anguish, uncertainty, and changes in their lives as a result of the lack of justice within a reasonable term, and due to the partial impunity existent with respect to those responsible for his death and the threats and harassment of which they have also been victim. These events have “magnified their suffering.” Consequently, the Commission requested that compensation for the next of kin of Mr. García Prieto be determined by the Court in equity, under the concept of non-pecuniary damages. 181. The common intervener maintained that the State was responsible for a series of violations of the human rights of Ramón Mauricio García Prieto and his next of kin, which caused them profound suffering and pain. Moreover, the common intervener argued that the lack of justice for the death of Mr. García Prieto initially generated a sense of frustration in his parents and sisters. According to the common intervener, this frustration has been transformed into a feeling of absolute powerlessness and the loss of confidence in the Salvadoran justice system, which has caused incommensurable suffering. In addition, the common intervener maintained that members of the García Prieto Giralt family have been victims of aggression, threats, and interference in their private lives, which have become worse as they relentlessly struggled for justice. As a result, they have lived in constant insecurity and in fear of their own State’s authorities which should have been protecting them. Given these factors, they requested that the Court order an amount in equity under the concept of non-pecuniary damages. 182. In its written closing arguments, the State requested that the Court deem the controversy concluded and that it be absolved of any wrongdoing. 183. International jurisprudence has repeatedly established that a judgment per se constitutes a form of reparation.111 184. Nonetheless, given the circumstances of the case sub judice, José Mauricio García Prieto Hirlemann and Gloria Giralt de García Prieto have suffered an injury to their psychological and moral integrity due to the lack of a complete investigation into the death of their son Ramón Mauricio García Prieto, as well as the failures in the investigation into the threats and harassment. As a result, the Court deems it appropriate to order the payment of compensation, fixed in equity, for the concept of non-pecuniary damages. 185. Therefore, the Court, in equity, establishes the sum of $20,000 (Twenty Thousand United States Dollars) for each victim, José Mauricio García Prieto Hirlemann and Gloria Giralt de García Prieto for the non-pecuniary damages suffered by them. This amount shall be delivered to each of them. 186. The State shall effectuate the payment of the compensation for the concept of non-pecuniary damages directly to the beneficiaries within a period of one year, counted from the date of notification of the present Judgment upon the parties. 111 Cf. Case of Suárez Rosero v. Ecuador. Reparations and Costs. Judgment of January 20, 1999. Series C No. 44, para. 72; Case of Cantoral Huamaní and García Santa Cruz, supra note 10, para. 180; Case of Zambrano Vélez et al., supra note 10, para. 142; and Case of Escué Zapata, supra note 10, para. 149.