99 359. Regarding the other means of reparation requested by the representatives in its brief of pleadings and motions,326 the Court considers that the issuing of the present Judgment and the reparations ordered in this chapter are sufficient and adequate for the reparation of the consequences of the violations suffered as a consequence of the forced disappearance of which Mr. Rosendo Radilla-Pacheco and his next of kin were victims. Those measures of reparation requested in a time-barred manner by the representatives in the final written arguments will not be considered by the Tribunal. D. D1. Indemnifications, compensations, costs, and expenses Pecuniary damages 360. The Court has developed in its jurisprudence the concept of pecuniary damages and the assumptions under which it shall be compensated.327 361. The Commission requested that the Court set, in equity, the amount of the compensation corresponding to the consequential damages and future losses. The representatives, on their part, made specific requests regarding pecuniary damages, which they included in the demand for future losses and consequential damages. The State, in its proposal of reparation presented to this Tribunal, reiterated its will to acknowledge as compensation for pecuniary damages the following items regarding future losses and consequential damages, the latter provided that the next of kin of Mr. Radilla-Pacheco prove the expenses incurred in. 362. As previously established by the Court, the reparations shall have a causal relationship with the facts of the case, the violations declared, the damages proven, as well as with the measures requested to repair the corresponding damages. Therefore, the Tribunal shall observe said concurrence in order to issue a rulin in due manner and pursuant with law.328 326 The representatives requested: i) the inclusion of the period named “dirty war” in the subject of history at public schools and “the elaboration of a textbook as well as documentaries regarding the ‘dirty war’; ii) the establishment of the “day of disappeared-detainees;” iii) the creation of commemoration spaces for the next of kin of the disappeared persons that may enable the intergenerational transmission of the memory of the “dirty war”; iv) public access to the historical archive gathered by the investigators attached to the General Office of Historical Investigation of the Special Prosecutors’ Office and the diffusion of the Historical Report to the Mexican society; v) the creation of a “memorial” museographic space of the “dirty war” at Atoyac de Álvarez; vi) the construction of a monument at the public plaza of Atoyac to remember the disappeared persons; vii) the establishment of a mechanism for the follow-up and verification of compliance of the reparation, made up be people of a well known moral authority within the society; viii) the opening of channels for the community’s political participation; ix) the formation of mutual support groups with the next of kin of disappeared persons and psychosocial support with trustworthy people of the next of kin, trained in the consequences of political violence and psychosocial trauma, and x) the creation of the Committee for the Search of People who Disappeared due to Political Motives. In their final arguments, the representatives requested, in a time-barred manner, other reparations, namely: i) the creation of a genetic bank for the identification of possible remains of disappeared persons; ii) the reform to the law on responsibility for damages so it will be a law for the comprehensive reparation of the damage, and iii) the issuance of a law on cooperation with the bodies of the Inter-American System. 327 This Tribunal has established that pecuniary damages assumes “the loss or detriment of the income of the victims, the expenses made due to the facts and the pecuniary consequences that have a causal relationship with the facts of the case.” Cf. Case of Bámaca Velásquez v. Guatemala. Reparations and Costs. Judgment of February 22, 2002. Series C No. 91, para 43; Case of Escher et al. v. Brazil, supra note 64, para. 224, and Case of Dacosta Cadogan v. Barbados, supra note 43, para. 111. 328 Cf. Case of Ticona Estrada et al., supra note 23, para. 110, and Case of Garibaldi v. Brazil, supra note 32, para. 186.