65 218. In it case-law, the Tribunal has determined several ways in which the nonpecuniary damage could be compensated239. The non-pecuniary damage may include both the suffering and distress caused to the direct victims, and the impairment of values that are highly significant to them, as well as other sufferings that cannot be assessed in financial terms, to the living conditions of the victims or their families. Since it is not possible to assign the non-pecuniary damage a precise monetary equivalent, it may only be compensated by the payment of a sum of money for the full reparation of the victim or the assignment of goods or services, determined by the Court, applying judicial discretion and the principle of equity as well as the execution of acts or works of a public nature or repercussion, which have effects such as recovering the memory of the victims and commitment to the efforts to ensure that human rights violations do not happen again.240 The first aspect of the non-pecuniary reparation is analyzed in this section and the second aspect has been analyzed in the previous section of this chapter. 219. The international case-law has repeatedly established that a judgment constitutes per se a form of reparation241. However, in view of the circumstances of the instant case, the sufferings that the violations have caused to the victim and his next -of -kin, the changes in the standards of living, and the other non-pecuniary consequences they bore, the Court deems it appropriate to award compensation for non-pecuniary damage, assessed on equitable grounds.242 220. The Court considers, as in similar cases,243 that the non-pecuniary damage sustained by Mr. Anzualdo Castro is evident, since it is human nature that a person subjected to forced disappearance suffers from deep pain, anguish, terror, impotence and insecurity. As a result, this damage need not be proven. 221. As to the next-of-kin, the Court repeats that the suffering caused to the victim “extends to the closest members of the family, particularly those who were in close affective contact with the victim.”244 Also, the Tribunal has also considered that the suffering or death – in this case, the forced disappearance – of a person causes non-pecuniary damage to his daughters, sons, wife or companion, mother and father, which does not have to be proved245. 239 Cf. Case of the “Street Children” (Villagrán Morales et al.) V. Guatemala. Reparations and Costs. Judgment of May 26, 2001. Series C No. 77, para. 84; Case of Perozo et al. V. Venezuela, supra note 6, para. 405; and Case of Rios et al. V. Venezuela, supra note 6, para. 396. 240 Cf. Case of the "Street Children” (Villagrán Morales et al.) V. Guatemala. Reparations and Costs, supra note 239, para. 84; Case of Perozo et al. V. Venezuela, supra note 6, para. 405; and Case of Rios et al. V. Venezuela, supra note 6, para. 396. 241 Cf. Case of Neira Alegría et al. V. Perú. Reparations and Costs. . Judgment of September 19, 1996. Series C No. 29, para. 56; case of Acevedo Buendía et al. (“Discharged and Retired Employees of the Comptroller”) V. Peru. Supra note 11, para. 133 and Case of Kawas Fernández V. Honduras, supra note 14, para. 184. 242 Cf. Case of Neira Alegría et al. V. Perú. Reparations and Costs, supra note 241 para. 56; case of Acevedo Buendía et al. (“Discharged and Retired Employees of the Comptroller”) V. Peru. Supra note 11, para. 133 and Case of Kawas Fernández V. Honduras, supra note 14, para. 184. 243 Cf. Case of the 19 Tradesmen V. Colombia, supra note 156, para. 248; Case of La Cantuta V. Peru, supra note 58, para. 217; and Case of Goiburú et al. V. Paraguay, supra note 59, para. 157, 244 Cf. Case of Las Palmeras V. Colombia. Reparations and Costs. Supra note 145, para. 55; Case of La Cantuta V. Peru, supra note 58, para. 218; and Case of Goiburú et al. V. Paraguay, supra note 59, para. 159. 245 This criterion has been held in similar cases regarding the daughters, sons, wife or companion, mother, father, among other peoples. Cf. Case of the Pueblo Bello Massacre V. Colombia, supra nota 75,