61 of Encarnación, Pedro, Eliseo, Estermerio, and María Rosaura, all with the last name of Chitay Rodríguez. XII REPARATIONS (Application of Article 63(1) of the Convention) 227. Based its decisions in this regard in Article 63(1) of the American Convention,241 the Court has indicated that each violation of an international obligation that has produced harm involves the duty to adequately repair the harm,242 and that this rule picks up on a customary rule that constitutes one of the fundamental principles of contemporary International Law regarding the responsibility of a State.”243 228. In consideration of the violations of the American Convention and ICFDP declared in the foregoing chapters, the Tribunal will analyze the claims presented by the Commission and the representatives, as well as the positions of the State, in light of the fixed criteria in the jurisprudence of the Court in relation with the nature and scope of the obligation to repair,244 so as to provide measures that will repair the harm caused to the victims. A. Injured Party 229. The Tribunal reiterates that the injured party is considered to be, in the terms of Article 63(1) of the Convention, those that have been declared as victims of the violation of any of the rights enshrined in the same. Therefore, this Tribunal considers the “injured party,” to be Mr. Florencio Chitay Nech, and his children Encarnación, Pedro, Eliseo, Estermerio, and María Rosaura, all with the last name of Chitay Rodríguez, who in their character as victims of the violations declared in Chapters VIII, IX, X, and XI, shall be the creditors of that which the Tribunal orders in continuation. In the case of Maria Rodriguez Quex, the State must take into account that suggested in paragraph 45 of the present Judgment, in the sense that the State, could at its discretion, adopt measures of reparation in her favor. B. Obligation to investigate the facts and identify, judge and, if it is the case, sanction those responsible 241 Article 63(1) of the Convention states that “[i]f the Court finds that freedom protected by [the] Convention, the Court shall rule that the injured right or freedom that was violated. It shall also rule, if appropriate, that situation that constituted the breach of such right or freedom be remedied the injured party.” there has been a violation of a right or party be ensured the enjoyment of his the consequences of the measure or and that fair compensation be paid to 242 Cf. Case Velásquez Rodríguez V. Honduras. Reparations and Costs. Judgment of 21 of July of 1989. Series C No. 7, para. 25; Case Radilla Pacheco V. México, supra note 12, para. 327, and Case Dos Erres Massacre V. Guatemala, supra note 12, para. 223. 243 Cf. Case of the “Children of the Street” (Villagrán Morales et. al. ) V. Guatemala. Reparations and Costs. Judgment of 26 of May of 2001. Series C No. 77, para. 62; Case Cantoral Benavides Vs Perú. Reparations and Costs. Judgment of 3 of December of 2001. Series C No. 88, para. 40, and Case Bámaca Velásquez V. Guatemala. Reparations and Costs. Judgment of 22 of February of 2002. Series C No. 91, para. 38. 244 Cf. Case Velásquez Rodríguez V. Honduras. Reparations and Costs, supra note 242, paras. 25 a 27; Case Usón Ramírez V. Venezuela, supra note 18, para. 159, and Case Dos Erres Massacre V. Guatemala, supra note 12, para. 288.