64 responsible State may not invoke provisions of domestic law to modify or fail to comply with its obligation to provide reparation, all aspects of which (scope, nature, methods and determination of the beneficiaries) are regulated by international law.122 141. As the term implies, reparations are measures intended to erase the effects of the violations committed. Their nature and amount depend on the damage caused at both the pecuniary and the non-pecuniary levels.123 In this regard, the reparations established should be in relation to the violations that have been declared in the preceding chapters of this judgment. A) BENEFICIARIES 142. The Court now summarizes the argument of the Inter-American Commission, the representative of the victim and her next of kin, and the State regarding who should be considered the beneficiaries of the reparations ordered by the Court. Arguments of the Commission 143. The Commission indicated that María Teresa De La Cruz Flores is the injured party in the instant case and, therefore the beneficiary of the reparations ordered by the Court. Arguments of the victim’s representatives 144. The victim’s representatives indicated that the beneficiaries of the reparations ordered by the Court are: María Teresa De La Cruz Flores, victim; Danilo and Ana Teresa Blanco De La Cruz, the victim’s children; Alcira Domitila Flores Rosas widow of De La Cruz, the victim’s mother; and Alcira Isabel, Celso Fernando and Jorge Alfonso De La Cruz Flores, the victim’s siblings. Arguments of the State 145. The State did not refer to the issue of the beneficiaries of any reparations the Court might order in this case. Considerations of the Court 146. Under Article 63(1) of the American Convention, the Court considers that María Teresa De La Cruz Flores is the injured party, because she is the victim of the violations of the rights established in Articles 9 and 5 of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) thereof, and in Articles 7 and 8 of the Convention, in relation to Articles 9 and 1(1) thereof. It also considers that the following are beneficiaries: Danilo and Ana Teresa Blanco De La Cruz, the victim’s children; Alcira Domitila Flores Rosas widow of De La Cruz, the victim’s mother; and Alcira Isabel, Celso Fernando and Jorge Alfonso De La Cruz Flores, the victim’s siblings, as victims of the violation of Article 5 of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) thereof. 122 Cf. Case of Tibi, supra note 1, para. 224; Case of the “Juvenile Reeducation Institute”, supra note 1, para. 259; and Case of Ricardo Canese, supra note 1, para. 194. 123 Cf. Case of Tibi, supra note 1, para. 225; Case of the “Juvenile Reeducation Institute”, supra note 1, para. 261; and Case of Ricardo Canese, supra note 1, para. 196.