39 b) the Court should take into account said circumstance upon determining the reparations and costs based on the principles of justice and equity; c) the public request for forgiveness made by the State to the relatives of Gerardo Vargas-Areco should be accepted as initial reparation in the instant case; and d) the Court should consider that on June 21, 2006, the State of Paraguay made a public acknowledgment of international liability at the headquarters of the National Chancery, for the purposes of the instant case. Considerations of the Court 138. In view of the acknowledgment of liability made by the State (supra paras. 20, 21, 30, 33 and 40 to 64), and in accordance with the foregoing considerations on the merits of the case, the Court found that the State violated Articles 8(1) (Right to Fair Trial) and 25 (Right to Judicial Protection) of the Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) (Obligation to Respect Rights) of said treaty, and Article 5(1) of the Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) (Obligation to Respect Rights) of said treaty, to the detriment of the relatives of the minor Gerardo Vargas-Areco (supra para. 97 and 110). Furthermore, the Court found that the State failed to fulfill the obligation to investigate the violation of the rights enshrined in Articles 4 and 5(1) of the Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) of said treaty, and Articles 6 and 8 of the Convention against Torture, to the detriment of the relatives of the minor Gerardo Vargas-Areco (supra para. 94). 139. This Court has repeatedly determined that it is a principle of International Law that any violations of an international obligation, which cause damage purport a duty to adequately make reparations.67 The decisions of the Court on this subject are based on Article 63(1) of the American Convention, which sets forth: If the Court finds that there has been a violation of a right or freedom protected by this Convention, the Court shall rule that the party harmed be ensured the enjoyment of his right or freedom that was violated. It shall also rule, if appropriate, that the consequences of the measure or situation that constituted the breach of such right or freedom be remedied and that fair compensation be paid to the party harmed. 140. The aforementioned Section 63(1) of the American Convention codifies a customary rule that is one of the fundamental principles of contemporary International Law regarding the responsibility of States. Thus, upon occurrence of an internationally wrongful act attributable to a State, the international liability arises as regards to such State, with the corresponding duty to make reparations and to have the consequences of the violation remedied.68 141. The reparation of the damage caused by the infringement of an international obligation requires, whenever possible, full restitution (restitutio in integrum), which consists in restoring the state of affairs prior to the infringement. Should that not be 67 Cf. Case of Montero-Aranguren et al. (Detention Center of Catia), supra note 4, para. 115; and Case of the Ituango Massacres, supra note 3, para. 345; Case of Baldeón-García, supra note 3, para. 174. 68 Cf. Case of Montero-Aranguren et al. (Detention Center of Catia), supra note 4, para. 116; Case of Ximenes-Lopes, supra note 3, para. 207; and Case of the Ituango Massacres, supra note 3, para. 346.