62 developed the concept of pecuniary damage and has established that this supposes “the loss or detriment to the victims’ income, the expenses incurred as a result of the facts, and the consequences of a pecuniary nature that have a causal nexus to the facts of the case.”267 On this basis, the Court will determine the pertinence of granting pecuniary reparations and the respective sums owed in this case. 214. In the case of indirect damage, the Court considers that the representatives’ claim refers to the expenses incurred by Mr. Lagos del Campo in the domestic judicial proceedings, so that this will be analyzed in the section on “costs and expenses” (infra, paras. 223 to 227). 215. With regard to loss of earnings, the Court observes that the representatives merely indicated that “Mr. Lagos del Campo was not reinstated in his job, and this curtailed his labor rights and, consequently, his social rights and benefits”; however, they did not provide specific evidence of the salary that Mr. Lagos del Campo received before the facts in their motions and pleadings brief, and the Court does not have specific information on the time that he was unemployed and the economic impact arising from the facts of this case. Despite this, the Court notes that, annex 2 of the Merits Report consists of “the pay slip of Mr. Lagos del Campo. Week of June 26 to July 2, 1989,” and annex 8 of the Merits Report contains the decision of the judge of the Fifteenth Labor Court of Lima of March 5, 1991, which records that, at the time of the facts, Mr. Lagos received as his last day’s wage the sum of 19,258.53 Intis.268 The Court finds that, owing to the dismissal and lack of judicial protection, the victim found himself in a difficulties with regard to his employment situation, and this affected his living conditions. Therefore, the Court finds that he shall be granted the sum of US$28,000 (twenty-eight thousand United States dollars). 216. Regarding the arguments concerning Mr. Lagos del Campo’s access to a legitimate retirement pension, the Court finds that, as a result of the violations that have been established stemming from his arbitrary dismissal, the violation of job security, and the subsequent lack of judicial protection, Mr. Lagos del Campo lost the possibility of having access to a pension and social benefits. Consequently, the Court finds that he shall be granted the reasonable sum of US$30,000 (thirty thousand United States dollars). 2. Non-pecuniary damage 217. The Commission requested that both pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage be included in the reparation. 218. The representatives asked the Court to establish, in equity, reparation for non-pecuniary damage, because the violation suffered by both the victim and his family had harsh consequences and signified serious mental and moral harm for each of them, especially the victim. 219. The State argued that the criteria cited by the representatives was based on case law that was unrelated to the facts of this case, because the case did not involve an egregious violation of human rights or the presumed violation of a right belonging to the “hard core” of human rights. Therefore, based on the violations in this case, the non-pecuniary damage would be of another nature and less serious than in the case of egregious human rights violations. Cf. Case of Bámaca Velásquez v. Guatemala. Reparations, supra, para. 43, and Case of Vásquez Durand v. Ecuador, supra, para. 227. 267 Cf. Fifteenth Judge of the Labor Court of Lima. Judgment 25-91 of March 5, 1991. Annexes to the petitioners’ communication of July 23, 1998 (evidence file, annex 8 to the Merits Report, f. 29); CEPER-PIRELLI. Pay slip of Alfredo Lagos del Campo. Week of June 26 to July 2, 1989. Annexes to the petitioners’ communication of July 23, 1998. Annex 2 to the Merits Report 27/15 (19,258.53 Intis = approximately US$6.41). 268