25 102. The Court is of the opinion that the effects that Mr. Suárez-Rosero's incommunicado detention may have had on his family would derive from the violation of Articles 5(2) and 7(6) of the American Convention. Those consequences may be taken up by this Court at the Reparations Stage. XVI Application of Article 63(1) 103. Article 63(1) of the American Convention provides that [i]f the Court finds that there has been a violation of a right or freedom protected by this Convention, the Court shall rule that the injured party be ensured the enjoyment of his right or freedom that was violated. It shall also rule, if appropriate, that the consequences of the measure or situation that constituted the breach of such right or freedom be remedied and that fair compensation be paid to the injured party. 104. In the application, the Commission requested the Court to decide a. that Ecuador must release Mr. Suárez-Rosero forthwith, without prejudice to the continuation of the case against him; b. that Ecuador must guarantee an exhaustive and prompt trial of the case against Mr. SuárezRosero, and adopt effective measures to ensure that this type of violation does not recur in future; c. that Ecuador must conduct an investigation to determine those responsible for the violations in the instant case and punish them; and d. that Ecuador must make reparation to Mr. Suárez-Rosero for the consequences of the violations committed. 105. There is no point to the Commission's first request inasmuch as it was made prior to Mr. Suárez-Rosero's release. 106. With regard to the Commission's second request, Ecuador presented the Court with documents to prove that the case against Mr. Suárez-Rosero had already been adjudicated (supra, para. 71). The Commission did not contest this fact and, although during the public hearing held at the Court Mr. Suárez-Rosero mentioned the existence of an appeal of that judgment, there is no evidence to support his statement (supra, para. 71). It is therefore unnecessary for the Court to refer to the first part of that request. Regarding the second part, the Court declares that Ecuador is obliged, in accordance with the general duties to respect rights and adopt provisions under domestic law (Article 1(1) and (2) of the Convention), to adopt such measures as may be necessary to ensure that violations such as those established in the instant case never again occur in its jurisdiction. 107. In view of the above, the Court is of the opinion that Ecuador must order an investigation to identify and, as appropriate, punish those responsible for the human rights violations referred to in this Judgment. 108. It is obvious that in the instant case the Court cannot determine that the injured party be guaranteed the enjoyment of his right or freedom that has been violated. However, it is proper that reparation be made for the consequences of the situation that constituted the violation of the specific rights in this Case, which must include fair