5 requirements of a reparation that extends beyond compensation or monetary redress, the general knowledge of the violations committed. In this sense, it has a more pronounced social, historical, moral, and pedagogic nature than other expressions of public justice. 21. To sum up, this is a sui generis form of justice that takes on the political and moral values of a given society and goes over the relations between political power and human beings. This is the reason why the hearings held by the Inter-American Court and the judgments rendered by it address issues that are formally not the subject-matter of the dispute but which nevertheless affect society as a whole and have to do with the duties created by the system of human rights protection, of which the Inter-American jurisdiction is a part. Fortunately, these particularities of human rights justice have been properly understood by the parties to the proceedings, and this allows cases to proceed subject to their distinctive features, which might be unnecessary or even inadmissible in other jurisdictions. ASSESSMENT OF THE SERIOUSNESS OF THE FACTS 22. The existence of very serious violations, in a context that is specifically injurious to the human rights of a large group of people, or of vulnerable individuals that would require special guarantees by the State, supports the Court’s ruling on reparations. It is here that the Court’s assessment of the significance and egregious nature of the violations and the nature and amount, if appropriate, of the reparations is expressed. Sometimes reference is made to the “aggravated liability” of the State when dealing with a series of violations that are particularly reprehensible. Strictly speaking, actually, there is no “aggravated liability” but facts that engage the State’s international responsibility and the seriousness of which warrants more serious consequences. 23. I have previously stated that liability –the capacity or duty to be answerable for certain facts, conduct, duties or guarantees— is a relationship between the holder of a right and the facts and conduct, viewed in the light of a given legal classification and specified legal consequences. Therefore, this is a formal concept that creates a link between the responsible party, the conduct for which such liability applies and the consequences flowing from the whole matter. Accordingly, liability in and of itself is neither aggravated nor mitigated. The serious or minor nature pertains to the facts and, therefore, influences the greater or lesser harshness of the reaction allowed by the legal system. The use of such expression may nevertheless be illustrative of the court’s disapproval of the wrongful conduct. REPARATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF LIABILITY 24. The case law of the Inter-American Court has been particularly dynamic and highly evolving on the subject of reparations. The development of Inter-American case law on this subject becomes obvious when reflecting upon the distance between a reparations scheme revolving around monetary compensation –which is most certainly indispensable and relevant—and another one which, in addition to compensation, makes provision for broadscope measures aimed at securing moral satisfaction for the victims and preventing new violations: for instance, through constitutional reforms, the enactment of laws, the repealing of general-scope provisions, the annulment of proceedings and judgments, political or judicial reforms, and so on. All of this applies to the entire public structure and concerns society as a whole, in addition to benefiting a given person or group of persons whose legitimate interests and proven rights are sought to be enforced.