given by the Supreme Court of Justice in the case of Casal is sufficient to ensure that guarantee.” According to the State, “local law and its jurisprudential interpretation are more than sufficient to ensure compliance in the local jurisdiction with the guarantees of [Article] 8(2)(h), and therefore with Article 2 of the Convention.” 161. The Court notes that in their brief of final arguments, the representatives alluded to measure of reparation that had not been requested in their brief containing pleadings and motions.124 In this regard, the Court reiterates that, according to Article 40(2)(d) of the Court’s Rules of Procedure, the claims of the representatives, including those relating to reparations, must be included in the initial pleadings and motions brief. Consequently, this request is time-barred and it is not appropriate to admit it or include any additional considerations in this regard.125 162. As to the measures requested by the Commission and by the representatives regarding the adoption of legislation or other measures, the Court considers that the issuance of this Judgment and the reparations ordered in this chapter are sufficient and adequate to remedy the violations suffered by the victims and does not find it necessary to order additional measures.126 163. Also, regarding the measures requested in relation to the protection of the right to appeal a judgment, the Court emphasizes that the purpose of its contentious jurisdiction is not to review national legislation and case law in the abstract.127 Consequently, and taking into account that the measures requested involve the analysis of legal norms and alleged legal and jurisprudential developments that were not applied in the case of Mr. Mohamed128, such as the regulation and judicial enforcement of the appeal in Argentina, the Court considers that it is not appropriate to issue a ruling on such requests in ordering reparations in this case. Nevertheless, the Court recalls that Argentina must comply with its general obligations to respect and ensure that the right to appeal the decision in accordance with Articles 8(2)(h), 1(1) and 2 of the American Convention and the parameters indicated by this Court on the matter, both in relation to the norms governing the system of review and the manner in which it is applied by the judicial bodies. E) Compensation for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages Arguments of the Commission and of the parties 164. The Commission asked the Court to order the State to “adopt the necessary measures to ensure that Oscar Alberto Mohamed receives adequate and timely reparation for the human rights violations set forth in the merits report.” 124 In their final arguments, the representatives requested the following measures that are not included in their pleadings and motions brief: “[l]egal provision for the formal admissibility of an appeal, by judicial bodies different from those that issued the appealed judgment”, and, although they had already called for the amendment of Article 280, they extended their request to have it “annulled” and in addition requested that “its application be conditioned to cases in which constitutional matters are not discuss[ed] or where the right to appeal had not been violated”. 125 Cf. Case of Forneron and daughter v. Argentina. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of April 27, 2012 Series C No. 242, para. 186. 126 Cf. Case of Radilla Pacheco v. Mexico, Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of 23 de November 2009. Series C No. 209, para. 359, and Case of Uzcátegui et al. v. Venezuela. Merits and Reparations. Judgment of September 3, 2012 Series C No. 249, para. 260. 127 Cf. Case of Genie Lacayo v. Nicaragua. Preliminary Objections. Judgment of January 27, 1995. Series C No. 21, para. 50, and Case of Contreras et al. v. El Salvador. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of August 31, 2011 Series C No. 232, para. 172. 128 The criminal procedural regimen applied to Mr. Mohamed, which therefore regulated the criminal trial, was the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1888 (Law 2372) (supra para. 40). 44