59 the arguments of the State, in light of the criteria established in its case law concerning the nature and scope of the obligation to make reparation, 263 in order to establish measures addressed at redressing the harm caused to the victim. A. Injured party 196. The Court confirms that, in accordance with Article 35(1) of the Rules of Procedure, only Alfredo Lagos del Campo, in his capacity as victim of the violations declared in this judgment, will be considered a beneficiary of the reparations ordered by the Court. Consequently, the Court will not refer to the arguments that sought reparations for other individuals. B. Measures of satisfaction 1. Publications 197. The representatives asked that the Court’s judgment be published in the Official Gazette and in a national newspaper within six months, as well as on the website of the Ministry of Justice and Human Rights, at no more than three links from the main webpage, and that it remain there until the judgment had been executed fully. In particular, they asked that, at the very least, the sections of the judgment on context, proven facts and the operative paragraphs be published. 198. The State indicated that it was not appropriate to grant the publication of the judgment as a reparation because there were no facts that the publication would clarify. However, should the Court order this, the inclusion of the context of the internal armed conflict experienced by Peru between 1980 and 2000 was not appropriate, because it was not part of the factual framework established by the Merits Report. Furthermore it was not incumbent on a Ministry of the Executive to make the publication because the said publication had always fallen within the State’s legitimate margin of discretion. 199. The Commission made no mention of this measure. 200. In this regard, the Court considers, as it has in other cases,264 that the State must publish, within six months of notification of this judgment: (a) the official summary of this judgment prepared by the Court, once, in the Official Gazette, in an appropriate and legible font size; (b) the official summary of this judgment prepared by the Court, once, in a national newspaper with widespread circulation, in an appropriate and legible font size, and (c) this judgment in full, available for one year, on an official website accessible to the public from the site’s home page. 201. The State must advise the Court immediately when it has made each of the publications ordered, irrespective of the one-year time frame for presenting its first report established in the thirteenth operative paragraph of the judgment. C. Other measures requested 202. International case law and, in particular, that of this Court, has established repeatedly that the judgment constitutes, in itself, a form of reparation. Nevertheless, the Court notes the other measures requested by the parties and will rule in this regard. 203. Regarding the other measures of satisfaction requested, the representatives asked that Cf. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez. Reparations, supra, para. 189, and Case of Acosta et al. v. Nicaragua, supra, para. 211. 263 264 205. Cf. Case of Chitay Nech et al. v. Guatemala, supra, para. 244, and Case of Zegarra Marín v. Peru, supra, para.