as possible, full restitution (restitutio in integrum), which consists in the restoration of the previous situation. If this is not feasible, as in most cases of human rights violations, the Court will determine measures to guarantee the rights that have been violated and to redress the consequences of those violations. 338 Accordingly, the Court has considered it necessary to grant different measures of reparation in order to redress the harm comprehensively; thus, in addition to pecuniary compensation, measures of restitution, rehabilitation and satisfaction, and guarantees of nonrepetition have special relevance for the harm caused. 339 165. The Court has also established that reparations must have a causal nexus with the facts of the case, the violations declared, the harm proved, and the measures requested to redress the respective damages. Therefore, the Court must observe this concurrence in order to rule appropriately and in accordance with the law. 340 In the instant case the Court considers that the reparations must include an analysis that considers not only the right of victims to obtain redress, but also one that incorporates a gender perspective, both in its formulation and in its implementation. 341 166. Taking into account the violations of the American Convention declared in the preceding chapters, and the criteria established in its case law regarding the nature and scope of the obligation to provide reparation, 342 the Court will now analyze the claims presented by the Commission and the representatives, as well as the arguments of the State, for the purpose of ordering measures aimed at redressing the damage caused by those violations. A. Injured party 167. Under the terms of Article 63(1) of the Convention, this Court considers as injured party anyone who has been declared a victim of the violation of any right recognized therein. Therefore, this Court considers the “injured party” to be Jineth Bedoya Lima and her mother, Luz Nelly Lima, and as victims of the violations described in Chapter VIII, they will be considered beneficiaries of the reparations ordered by the Court. B. Obligation to investigate the facts and identify, prosecute and punish, as appropriate, those responsible 168. The Commission recommended that the Court order the State to carry out a complete, impartial and effective investigation within a reasonable period of time to establish all the circumstances of all the crimes committed against Ms. Bedoya, including the threats and sexual violence, and determine all the corresponding responsibilities (perpetrators, masterminds, accomplices and accessories), including the possible participation of State agents. It also requested that all necessary measures be adopted to guarantee the safety of Ms. Bedoya and her family during these investigations and proceedings. 169. The representatives also asked that the State carry out a complete, impartial, exhaustive investigation of the facts and establish all levels of responsibility for what happened to Ms. Bedoya Cf. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez v. Honduras. Reparations and Costs, supra, paras. 25 and 2; and Case of Grijalva Good v. Ecuador, supra, para. 164. 338 Cf. Case of the “Las Dos Erres” Massacre v. Guatemala. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of November 24, 2009. Series C No. 211, para. 226; and Case of Grijalva Good v. Ecuador, supra, para. 164. 339 Cf. Case of Ticona Estrada v. Bolivia. Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of November 27, 2008. Series C No. 191, para. 110; and Case of Grijalva Good v. Ecuador, supra, para. 165. 340 341 Cf. Case of I.V. v. Bolivia, supra, para. 326, and Case of Guzmán Albarracín et al v. Ecuador, supra, para. 215. Cf. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez v. Honduras. Reparations and Costs, supra, paras. 25 to 27, and Case of Azul Rojas Marín et al. v. Peru, supra, para. 225. 342 59