64 ii) the State must pay US $50,000.00 (fifty thousand dollars of the United States of America) to repair the physical and mental infringement suffered by Mr. Alfredo López Álvarez. They requested that the Court set in equity the “moral damage” caused to Mrs. Teresa Reyes Reyes, as well as to Mr. López Álvarez’s children, and those of Mrs. Reyes Reyes. However, in the closing arguments they requested that the Court set in equity US$100,000.00 (one hundred thousand dollars of the United States of America) in favor of Alfredo López Álvarez for “moral damage” and US$50,000.00 (fifty thousand dollars of the United States of America) in reparation to Mrs. Teresa Reyes Reyes for that same concept. Finally, they requested that the Tribunal set in equity an amount for the other next of kin of the victim, his parents, children, and siblings for their “moral damage”, and iii) the violations to the human rights of Mr. Alfredo López Álvarez deprived him of the possibility to develop his life project, therefore not being able to reach his personal, professional, and family objectives that he had set for himself along with his family, reason for which they requested the Court to, in equity, order the State to repair the damage caused to the life project of the alleged victim. 198. Arguments of the State: It stated that the non-pecuniary damages referred to in the application do not proceed. Considerations of the Court 199. Non-pecuniary damages may include both suffering and affliction, detriment to very significant personal values, as well as non-pecuniary alterations in the conditions of existence of a victim. Since it is not possible to assign a precise monetary equivalent to non-pecuniary damages, for the purposes of a comprehensive reparation to the victims, it can only be the object of compensation in two forms. First, through payment of an amount of money or delivery of goods or services that can be estimated in monetary terms, which the Tribunal will establish through reasonable application of judicial discretion and equity. And, second, through acts or works which are public in their scope or effects, which among other effects have that of acknowledging the victim’s dignity and avoiding the repetition of the violations.126 200. International jurisprudence has repeatedly established that the judgment constitutes, per se, a form of reparation.127 However, due to the circumstances of the case sub judice, the suffering that the facts have caused the victim and his next of kin, the change in their living conditions, and the other non-pecuniary consequences suffered by them, the Court considers it convenient to determine the payment of a compensation, set with equity, for non-pecuniary damages. 126 Cf. Case of García-Asto and Ramírez-Rojas, supra note 7, para. 276; Case of Palamara-Iribarne, supra note 15, para. 234; and Case of the “Mapiripán Massacre”, supra note 15, para. 282. 127 Cf. Case of Blanco-Romero et al., supra note 7, para. 69; Case of García-Asto and Ramírez-Rojas, supra note 7, para. 268; and Case of Palamara-Iribarne, supra note 15, para. 258.