258. The State presented no argument against the reparation sought by the Commission and the representatives. 259. In this regard, the Court considers that, as it has ordered in other cases276, the State shall publish the following, within six months from the notification of this Judgment: - the official summary of the Judgment written by the Court, once only, in the Official Gazette; - the official summary of the Judgment written by the Court, once only, in a newspaper of broad national circulation, and - the present Judgment in its entirety, to be posted on a government website for a period of one year. b) Public act acknowledging international liability 260. The Commission requested that the Court order the State to publicly acknowledge its international responsibility. 261. Similarly, the representatives requested a public act of apology to the victims “both verbal and written” to be presided over by the highest State authorities, including “the President of the Republic and the President of the Supreme Court.” 262. The State did not comment on the requests from the Commission or the representatives. 263. The Court has determined that in certain cases it is justified that the States acknowledge their responsibility through a public act, in order to achieve its full effect277. In this particular case, it is appropriate to adopt a measure of that nature and the State shall make reference to the human rights violations described in this Judgment. The State shall ensure the participation of those victims who wish to be present, and shall invite the organizations that represented the victims in national and international proceedings. The conduct and other details of the public ceremony shall be duly discussed in advance with the victims’ representatives. The State is granted a period of one year from the notification of this Judgment to comply with this obligation. 264. Regarding the State authorities who should be present or participate in this act, the Court, as it has done in other cases, states that these authorities must be of high rank. It will be up to the State to decide to whom this task should be entrusted. However, the Judicial Branch must be represented at the ceremony. 3. Guarantees of non-repetition 276 Cf. Case of Barrios Altos supra note ¡Error! Marcador no definido., Operative Paragraph 5.d) and Case of Fontevecchia and D`Amico, supra note 28, para. 108. 277 Cf. Case of Cantoral Benavides v. Peru. Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of December 3, 2001. Series C No. 88, para. 81 and Case of the Massacre of Pueblo Bello v. Colombia. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of January 31, 2006. Series C No. 140, para. 254. 76