80 253. In particular, the psychological or psychiatric treatment must be provided by State personnel and institutions specialized in attending to victims of acts of violence such as those that occurred in this case. If the State does not have this type of service available, it must have recourse to specialized private or civil society institutions. When providing this treatment, the specific circumstances and needs of each victim must be considered, so that they are offered individual and family treatment, as agreed upon by each of them, and following an individual evaluation.289 Lastly, this treatment must be provided, insofar as possible, in the institutions nearest to their place of residence. The victims that request this measure of reparation, or their legal representatives, have six months as of the notification of this Judgment to inform the State of their specific requests for psychological or psychiatric treatment. The Court highlights the need for the State and the representatives to offer their best collaborative efforts and to provide the victims with all the information necessary for said victims to receive the psychological treatment in order to advance the implementation of this measure in an agreed upon manner. xii) Codification of the crime of torture in the Criminal Code of the state of Guerrero 254. The representatives requested the Court to order the State to appropriately codify the crime of torture in the criminal legislation of the state of Guerrero so that those involved in judicial operations of said state can effectively investigate and punish those responsible for the conducts that fall into said penal codification. In their final written arguments, the representatives requested that the Court order the State to “reform the norms in which the crime of torture in Guerrero is legislated,” which “do not satisfy the minimum conventional standards, and which have been included in a normative body different from the state Criminal Code.” 255. The Court determined in this case that the investigation for the crime of rape is not incompatible with the obligations of the Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture (supra para. 186). For this reason, the Court considers that it is not necessary to address this requested measure of reparation. xiii) Award of scholarships 256. The representatives asked the Court to order the State to award scholarships to Mrs. Rosendo Cantú and her daughter, given that they considered that “the only way they can improve their lives is to continue with their studies.” 257. The Court has established in this Judgment that the facts of the case harmed Mrs. Rosendo Cantú and her daughter and this harm continues and has resulted in significant alterations to their lives and also to their domestic relations and their relations with the community, which have affected their personal development (supra paras. 130, 131, 138, and 139). Based on the foregoing, and bearing in mind the representatives’ request, the Court finds it appropriate to order as a measure of satisfaction in this case, as it has in other cases,290 that the State awards scholarships in Mexican public establishments to Mrs. Rosendo Cantú and her daughter, Yenys Bernardino Rosendo, that covers all the costs of their education until the completion of their higher education, whether of technical or university studies. The State’s compliance with the obligation implies that the beneficiaries must take certain measures to exercise their right to this 289 Cf. 19 Tradesmen v. Colombia. Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of July 5, 2004. Series C No. 109, para. 278; Case of Chitay Nech et al., supra note 25, para. 256, and Case of Manuel Cepeda Vargas, supra note 25, para. 235. 290 Cf. Case of the Gómez Paquiyauri Brothers v. Perú. Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of July 8, 2004. Series C No. 110, para. 237; Case of Cantoral Huamaní and García Santa Cruz v. Perú. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of July 10, 2007. Series C No. 167, para. 194, and Case of Valle Jaramillo et al., supra note 234, paras. 227 subsection (f) and 231