violations and also establish the payment of an indemnity as compensation for the damage caused34. A State may not invoke provisions of domestic law in order to modify or fail to comply with the obligation to make reparation, all aspects of which (scope, nature, forms and determination of the beneficiaries) are regulated by international law35. 62. With regard to violation of the right to life and other rights (freedom, humane treatment, a fair trial and judicial protection), since restitutio in integrum is not possible and in view of the nature of the right violated, the reparation is made, inter alia, pursuant to the practice of international jurisprudence through fair monetary compensation, to which should be added the positive measures taken by the State to ensure that there is no repetition of offending acts, such as those in this case36. 63. As the word indicates, reparations consist in measures intended to eliminate the effects of the violations committed. Their nature and amount depend on the damage caused of both a pecuniary and a non-pecuniary nature. Reparations are not supposed to enrich or impoverish the victim or his heirs37. In this respect, the reparations established in this judgment must be consistent with the violations found in the judgment on merits delivered by the Court on January 26, 2000 (supra para. 6). VIII REPARATIONS 64. The Court will now proceed to examine the claims presented by the parties during this stage of the proceeding in order to determine the measures of reparation for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages and other types of reparation, in accordance with the elements of evidence collected during the different stages of the proceeding and in the light of the criteria established by this Court in its jurisprudence. A) PECUNIARY DAMAGE 65. In this chapter, the Court will begin to determine the reparations for pecuniary damage, which presumes loss or harm to the victims’ earnings, expenses incurred as a result of the facts, and the consequences of a pecuniary nature that have a relation of cause and effect with the facts of the case sub judice38; to this 34 cf. Cantoral Benavides case. Reparations, supra note 3, para. 41; Durand and Ugarte case. Reparations (Article 63(1), American Convention on Human Rights). Judgment of December 3, 2001. Series C No. 88, para. 25; and Barrios Altos case. Reparations (Article 63(1), American Convention on Human Rights). Judgment of November 30, 2001. Series C No. 87, para. 25. 35 cf. Cantoral Benavides case. Reparations, supra note 3, para. 41; Cesti Hurtado case. Reparations, supra note 3, para. 34; and The “Street Children” case (Villagrán Morales et al.). Reparations, supra note 3, para. 61. 36 cf. The “White Van” case (Paniagua Morales et al.). Reparations, supra note 4, para. 80; Castillo Páez case. Reparations, supra note 29, para. 52; and Garrido and Baigorria case. Reparations (Article 63(1), American Convention on Human Rights). Judgment of August 27, 1998. Series C No. 39, para. 41. 37 cf. Cantoral Benavides case. Reparations, supra note 3, para. 42; Cesti Hurtado case. Reparations, supra note 3, para. 36; and The “Street Children” case (Villagrán Morales et al.). Reparations, supra note 3, para. 63. 38 cf. The “White Van” case (Paniagua Morales et al.). Reparations, supra note 4, paras. 99 and 169; and Castillo Páez case. Reparations, supra note 29, para. 76.