83 e) Public apology and acknowledgment of international responsibility 216. The Court notes with appreciation Suriname’s statement that it “has no objections to issue a public apology to the whole nation with regard to the occurrences that took place in the Village of Moiwana and to the survivors and family members in particular.” In this regard, as a measure of satisfaction to the victims and in attempt to guarantee the non-repetition of the serious human rights violations that have occurred, the State shall publicly recognize its international responsibility for the facts of the instant case and issue an apology to the Moiwana community members. This public ceremony shall be performed with the participation of the Gaanman, the leader of the N’djuka people, as well as high-ranking State authorities, and shall be publicized through the national media. Furthermore, in consideration of the particular circumstances of the instant case, the event must also honor the memory of Herman Gooding, the civilian police official who was murdered due to his courageous efforts to investigate the events of November 29, 1986. 217. The aforementioned ceremony must be organized and funded by the State and completed within one year from the date of notification of the present judgment. f) Monument 218. Finally, the Court also notes with satisfaction Suriname’s assertion that it “has no objections to establish a memorial to point out the occurrences that took place in the Village of Moiwana […] this memorial must be a reminder to the whole nation of what happened and what may not [be] repeat[ed] in the future.” For those very reasons – to memorialize the events of November 29, 1986, as well as to prevent the recurrence of such dreadful actions in the future – the State shall build a monument and place it in a suitable public location. The memorial’s design and location shall be decided upon in consultation with the victims’ representatives, and shall be completed within one year from the date of notification of the instant judgment. XIV LEGAL COSTS AND FEES Arguments of the Commission 219. On this matter, the Commission argued that: a) neither the Moiwana survivors nor their representatives should be obliged to bear the costs associated with the legal representation necessary to confront the ongoing injustice in this case; and b) an award of costs and fees that is reasonable and justified is essential in this case; it should take into account past and current legal costs and fees, as well as those necessary to pursue the matter before the Court through all stages including compliance with an eventual judgment. Arguments of the representatives 220. The representatives requested an award of all costs incurred in preparing and pursuing the case domestically and before the Commission and the Court,