Considerations of the Court 282. In its case law, the Court has developed the concept of pecuniary damage and has established that this supposes “the loss of or detriment to the earnings of the victims, the expenditure incurred as a result of the facts, and the consequences of a pecuniary nature that have a causal nexus with the facts of the case.”305 283. According to the arguments presented by the parties and the Commission, the Court finds it necessary to determine the criteria used to establish the amounts corresponding to pecuniary damage. To this end it will determine: (i) the amounts of compensation for pecuniary damage of the titular members Oswaldo Cevallos, Jaime Nogales, Mauro Terán, Simón Zabala, Miguel Camba, Luis Rojas and Enrique Herrería; (ii) it will decide the dispute on the compensation for the alternate member Manuel Jaramillo Córdova, and (iii) it will determine if the payment of interest is appropriate. 1.1. Calculation of the pecuniary damage of the titular members 284. This Court takes into consideration the representatives’ request to take into account the details of the earnings as documentary proof, and the State’s position in its arguments indicating that, if it should be sentenced, it would pay the victims the amounts they failed to receive from December 2004 to March 24, 2007 (supra paras. 277 and 280). 285. Among the relevant evidence for making the calculation, the Court observes that, together with the pleadings and motions brief, the representatives forwarded, inter alia, the “payroll” slips of the Constitutional Tribunal from July 2003 to October 2004 for Mr. Terán Cevallos, and from February to July 2004 for Mr. Cevallos Bueno; together with a table of the Constitutional Court with the remunerations of Mr. Rojas Bajaña during December 2004, and bank certifications for Mr. Herrería Bonnet.306 In addition, with the said brief, the representatives included a table with the projected amount of the total owed to the judges by the State, indicating that, in the case of Messrs. Camba Campos, Herrería Bonnet, Jaramillo Córdoba, Nogales Izurieta, Rojas Bajaña, Terán Cevallos and Zabala Guzmán, the amount is US$219,112.70, and for former member Cevallos Bueno the amount would be US$220,089.83 (supra para. 278).307 In addition, the representatives provided notes of the Constitutional Court with “details of the earnings, per diems and other benefits” received by seven of the eight former members in 2003 and 2004.308 305 Cf. Case of Bámaca Velásquez v. Guatemala. Reparations and costs. Judgment of February 22, 2002. Series C No. 91, para. 43, and Case of Suárez Peralta v. Ecuador, para. 212. 306 Cf. Constitutional Tribunal, Payment of salaries of Mauro Leónidas, Terán Cevallos from July 2003 to October 2004, and Freddy Oswaldo Cevallos Bueno from February to July 2004; Constitutional Court, Remuneration of Luis Vicente Rojas Bajaña, December 2004, and Banco Pichincha, statements of Pablo Enrique Herrería Bonnet for 2003 and 2004 (file of annexes to the pleadings and motions brief, tome I, folios 3501 to 3548). 307 According to the representatives, this difference is related to the fact that the average monthly earnings of Mr. Cevallos Bueno in 2003 and 2004 were higher than the other former judges. 308 Cf. Constitutional Court, Notes Nos. 0034-CC-SG-2012 (Miguel Camba Campos); 0035-CC-SG-2012 (Simón Bolívar Zabala Guzmán); 0036-CC-SG-2012 (Jaime Manuel Nogales Izurieta); 0037-CC-SG-2012 (Luis Vicente Rojas Bajaña); 0038-CC-SG-2012 (Mauro Leónidas Terán Cevallos); 0039-CC-SG-2012 (Pablo Enrique Herrería Bonnet) of April 20, 2012, and Note No. 040/CC/SGI/2012 (Freddy Oswaldo Cevallos Bueno) of July 9, 2012 (merits file, tome II, folios 896 to 916). 82