establishes, as it has in other cases,508 that the State must provide written information to the victims’ representatives on the process of identification and return of the remains of those who died in the massacres and, as appropriate, request their collaboration for the pertinent purposes. Copies of these communications must be presented to the Court to be considered during the monitoring of compliance with this Judgment. C. Measures of restitution, rehabilitation and satisfaction, and guarantees of nonrepetition 335. International case law and, in particular, that of the Court, has established repeatedly that the judgment may constitute per se a form of reparation.509 However, based on the circumstances of the case and the adverse effects on the victims as a result of the violations of the American Convention declared to their detriment, the Court considers it pertinent to determine the following measures of reparation. 1) Measures of restitution a) 336. Development program for the village of El Mozote and nearby places The Commission did not present any request in this regard. 337. The representatives indicated that the communities of El Mozote and nearby places do not have adequate public roads, access to public water and electricity services, access to health care services and schools. Consequently, they requested that the State “create a development program for these communities that includes all the said aspects.” In other words, the rehabilitation of the public roads and the construction of at least one health care center and one school at a place that is accessible for most of the villages. In addition, given the situation of the surviving victims, they asked that the State include scholarships for the next of kin of the victims who are of school age, and the establishment of centers for the elderly. 338. The State expressed its willingness to agree to and promote a social development program in favor of the victims in this case, within the reasonable time required by such a program. Thus, it explained that, within the framework of the dialogue it maintains with the affected communities, it is designing and planning a development program for the village of El Mozote and nearby places, based on the main needs that are identified and agreed on, but bearing in mind the interest in certain specific projects, such as the home for the elderly, scholarships and connecting road. To this end, it will prepare a comprehensive plan for social development infrastructure and economic stimulus, and for the provision of public services, without prejudice to responding to the details of possible measures of reparation established in the judgment on reparations delivered by the Court in this case. 339. The Court assesses positively the State’s willingness to institute a social development program in favor of the victims in this case. In view of the harm caused by the facts of this case to the members of the communities belonging to the village of El Mozote, the canton of La Joya, the villages of Ranchería, Los Toriles, and Jocote Amarillo, and the canton of Cerro Pando, this Court establishes, as it has in other cases,510 that, in these communities and irrespective of the public works included in the national budget destined to that region or municipality, the State must implement in these communities in full coordination with the victims and their representatives, a development program that includes the following: (a) improvements to the public road system; (b) access to public services of water and electricity; (c) establishment of a 508 Cf. Case of the Las Dos Erres Massacre v. Guatemala, para. 249. 509 Cf. Case of El Amparo v. Venezuela. Reparations and costs. Judgment of September 14, 1996. Series C No. 28, para. 35, and Case of Furlan and family v. Argentina, para. 319. 510 Cf. Case of Masacre Plan de Sánchez v. Guatemala. Reparations and costs. Judgment of November 19, 2004. Series C No. 116, para. 105, and Case of the Río Negro Massacres v. Guatemala, para. 284. 108