180. The State and the representative also indicated that, currently, all the victims have a pension from the Social Security Institute of the National Police; they receive a pension and the corresponding benefits. 181. In the instant case, the Court notes that the representative requested specific sums for each of the victims, but failed to provide any vouchers for the Court to assess the pecuniary damage related to the expenditure for consequential damage, nor any justification for the loss of earnings 182. Based on the above, the Court notes that the victims continued to receive, as applicable, pensions and remuneration while they remained detained and during the police criminal proceedings. In the case of the four victims who were on active duty, they were subsequently reinstated. Consequently, the Court establishes, in equity, the sum of US$10,000.00 (ten thousand United States dollars) for pecuniary damage for each victim. This sum must be delivered to each of the victims: Jorge Humberto Villarroel Merino, Mario Romel Cevallos Moreno, Jorge Enrique Coloma Gaibor, Fernando Marcelo López Ortiz, Leoncio Amílcar Ascázubi Albán and Alfonso Patricio Vinueza Pánchez. D.2 Non-pecuniary damage 183. The Court has also developed the concept of non-pecuniary damage in its case law and has established that this may include both the suffering and afflictions caused to the direct victims and their family, and the impairment of values of great significance for the individual, as well as the alterations, of a non-pecuniary nature, in the living conditions of the victims or their families. 163 184. To establish the compensation, the Court will take into account the violations that have been declared and the harm caused. 185. The State noted that the victims had not substantiated their claims based on the parameters established by inter-American case law. Nor had they substantiated the presumed specific nonpecuniary damage they alleged they had suffered. The State even pointed out some contradictory allegations. 186. In the instant case, the Court declared the violation of personal liberty in relation to the unlawful and arbitrary detention of Jorge Humberto Villarroel Merino, Jorge Coloma Gaibor, Fernando López Ortiz, Amílcar Ascázubi Albán and Patricio Vinueza Pánchez for one year and Mario Cevallos Moreno for five months and seventeen days, 164 all of whom did not have an appropriate and effective remedy to control their deprivation of liberty, or judicial guarantees, because they did not have an independent and impartial judge. Therefore, the Court understands that, given the nature of the facts and the violations determined in this judgment, the victims suffered nonpecuniary harm that should be compensated. Consequently, it determines, in equity, the following sum for each of the victims: a) b) c) d) e) f) Jorge Humberto Villarroel Merino: US$30,000.00 (thirty thousand United States dollars); Mario Romel Cevallos Moreno: US$20,000.00 (twenty thousand United States dollars); Jorge Enrique Coloma Gaibor: US$30,000.00 (thirty thousand United States dollars); Fernando Marcelo López Ortiz: US$30,000.00 (thirty thousand United States dollars); Leoncio Amílcar Ascázubi Albán: US$30,000.00 (thirty thousand United States dollars), and Alfonso Patricio Vinueza Pánchez: US$30,000.00 (thirty thousand United States dollars). 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, and Case of Grijalva Bueno v. Ecuador, supra, para. 189. 163 Mr. Cevallos Moreno was released on November 13, 2003, and Messrs. Coloma Gaibor, López Ortiz, Ascázubi Albán and Vinueza Pánchez on May 25, 2004. Lastly, Mr. Villarroel Merino was released on June 4, 2004. 164 45