127 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. 346. This article reflects a customary norm that constitutes one of the basic principles of contemporary international law on State responsibility. Thus, when an unlawful act occurs, which can be attributed to a State, this gives rise immediately to its international responsibility, with the consequent obligation to cause the consequences of the violation to cease and to repair the damage caused.257 347. Whenever possible, reparation of the damage caused by the violation of an international obligation requires full restitution (restitutio in integrum), which consists in the re-establishment of the previous situation. If this is not possible, as in the instant case, the international Court must determine a series of measures to ensure that, in addition to guaranteeing respect for the violated rights, the consequences of the violations are remedied and, inter alia, compensation is established for the damage caused.258 The responsible State may not invoke provisions of domestic law to modify or fail to comply with its obligation to provide reparation, all aspects of which (scope, nature, methods and determination of the beneficiaries) is regulated by international law.259 348. Reparations consist of measures tending to eliminate the effects of the violations that have been committed. Their nature and amount depend on both the pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage that as been caused. Reparations should not make the victims or their successors either richer or poorer.260 349. In light of these criteria and the circumstances of the instant case, the Court will proceed to examine the claims submitted by the parties regarding reparations, so as to order measures designed to repair the damage in this case. A) Beneficiaries The Commission’s arguments 350. The Commission indicated that, in keeping with the nature of this case, the beneficiaries of the reparations were the persons described in Appendix B of the application. 257 Cf. Case of Baldeón García, supra note 5, para. 175; Case of the Sawhoyamaxa Indigenous Community, supra note 9, para. 196; and Case of Acevedo Jaramillo et al., supra note 12, para. 295. 258 Cf. Case of Baldeón García, supra note 5, para. 176; Case of the Sawhoyamaxa Indigenous Community, supra note 9, para. 197; and Case of Acevedo Jaramillo et al., supra note 12, para. 296. 259 Cf. Case of Baldeón García, supra note 5, para. 175; Case of the Sawhoyamaxa Indigenous Community, supra note 9, para. 197; and Case of Acevedo Jaramillo et al., supra note 12, para. 296. 260 Cf. Case of Baldeón García, supra note 5, para. 177; Case of the Sawhoyamaxa Indigenous Community, supra note 9, para. 198; and Case of Acevedo Jaramillo et al., supra note 12, para. 297.