VII REPARATIONS (Application of Article 63(1) of the Convention) 97. Based on the provisions of Article 63(1) of the American Convention, 68 the Court has indicated that any violation of an international obligation that has produced harm entails the obligation to repair it adequately 69 and that this provision embodies a customary norm that constitutes one of the fundamental principles of contemporary international law on State responsibility. 70 98. Reparation of the damage caused by abridgment of an international obligation requires, whenever possible, full reparation (restitutio in integrum), consisting of reestablishment of the situation prior to the violation. If this is not possible, as in the instant case, the Court must order a series of measures that, in addition to ensuring respect for the rights abridged, will redress the consequences caused by the infringements and order, inter alia, payment of compensation for the damage caused. 71 99. This Court has established that reparations must be related to the facts of the case, the violations that have been declared, the damage proven, and the measures requested to repair the respective damage. Consequently, the Court must respect all these factors to ensure that its ruling is appropriate and in keeping with the law. 72 100. The Court will examine the claims of the Commission and the representatives and the State's arguments, in order to provide measures to repair the damage caused to the victims. Regarding the State's arguments, the Court notes that Argentina specifically ruled on the request of the representatives to amend the legislation (infra para. 112). Regarding the other measures of reparation, the State said that "it will be subject to what [this] Court decides." A. Injured Party 101. The Court reiterates that, under Article 63(1) of the American Convention, anyone declared a victim of the violation of any right embodied thereof is considered 68 Article 63(1) of the American Convention: 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 injured party 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 injured party. 69 Cf. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez V. Honduras. Reparations and Costs. Judgment of July 21, 1989. Serie C No. 7, para. 25, and Case of Barbani Duarte et al. V. Uruguay, supra note 8, para. 239. 70 Cf. Case of Castillo Páez V. Perú. Reparations and Costs. Judgment of Noviembre 27, 1998. Serie C No. 43, para. 50, and Case of Barbani Duarte et al. V. Uruguay, supra note 8, para. 239. 71 Cf. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez V. Honduras. Reparations and Costs, supra note 69, para. 26, and Case of Barbani Duarte et al. V. Uruguay, supra note 8, para. 240. 72 Cf. Case of Ticona Estrada et al. V. Bolivia. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 27, 2008. Serie C No. 191, para. 110, and Case of Barbani Duarte et al. V. Uruguay, supra note 8, para. 241. 31