104 216. Non pecuniary damage may cover both the suffering and distress caused to the direct victim and the victim’s relatives, the impairment of values of major personal significance, and the non pecuniary changes to the victim’s or the victim’s family’s living conditions. Since accurately quantifying non pecuniary damage is impossible, such damage can only be compensated, for the purpose of providing comprehensive reparation to the victim, through the payment of such sum of money or the provision of such goods or services of monetary worth as may be determined by the Court, in fairness and at its reasonable judicial discretion, and through public action or works aimed at giving recognition to the victim’s human dignity and preventing any further human rights violations.165 The former aspect of reparation of non pecuniary damage will be analyzed in this section, whereas the latter aspect will be addressed in section D) of this chapter. 217. As held by the Court in previous cases,166 the non pecuniary damage caused to Hugo Muñoz-Sánchez, Dora Oyague-Fierro, Marcelino Rosales-Cárdenas, Bertila Lozano-Torres, Luis Enrique Ortiz-Perea, Armando Richard Amaro-Cóndor, Robert Edgar Teodoro-Espinoza, Heráclides Pablo-Meza, Juan Gabriel Mariños-Figueroa, and Felipe Flores-Chipana is evident, as it is human nature for any person who is subjected to arbitrary detention, forced disappearance or extra-legal execution to experience deep suffering, distress, terror, impotence and insecurity, which is why no proof of such damage is required. As noted above (supra para. 210), the Court considers that the State has already provided compensation for such damage, in connection with the civil damages awarded to the ten victims that were executed or caused to disappear. 218. As regards the next of kin of the ten victims that were executed or caused to disappear, the Court insists that the suffering caused to the victim “extends to the closest members of the family, particularly those who were in close affective contact with the victim.”167 Furthermore, the Court has found that a person’s suffering or death – in this case, the forced disappearance and extra-legal execution – cause non pecuniary damage to that person’s daughters, sons, spouse or common-law spouse, and mother and father, which is why no proof is required in this regard.168 219. International courts have repeatedly held that a judgment is, in and of itself, a form of redress.169 The Court does, however, consider it necessary to order, in fairness,170 payment of the following sums as compensation for non pecuniary damage on account of the suffering of the next of kin of the ten victims that were caused to disappear or 165 Cf. Case of Goiburú et al., supra note 1, para. 156; Case of Montero-Aranguren et al. (Detention Center of Catia), supra note 97, para. 130; and Case of Ximenes-Lopes, supra note 6, para. 227. 166 Cf. Case of Goiburú et al., supra note 1, para. 157; Case of the Ituango Massacress, supra note 8, para. 384, and Case of the Pueblo Bello Massacre, supra note 3, para. 255. 167 Cf. Case of Goiburú et al., supra note 1, para. 159; Case of Montero-Aranguren et al. (Detention Center of Catia), supra note 97, para. 132(b); and Case of the Pueblo Bello Massacre, supra note 3, para. 257. 168 So was found in other cases as well, also with regard to the daughters, sons, spouse, common-law spouse, mother and father, among others. Cf. Case of Goiburú et al., supra note 1, para. 159; Case of the Ituango Massacress, supra note 8, para. 386; and Case of the Pueblo Bello Massacre, supra note 3, para. 257. 169 Cf. Case of Almonacid-Arellano et al., supra note 6, para. 161; Case of Vargas-Areco, supra note 1, para. 150; and Case of Goiburú et al., supra note 1, para. 160. 170 Cf. Case of Goiburú et al., supra note 1, para. 160; Case of the Ituango Massacress, supra note 8, para. 390; and Case of the Pueblo Bello Massacre, supra note 3, para. 258.