50 i) “[i]n view of the existence of violations to the due process during the criminal case of [Mr.] Acosta Calderón[,] one form of reparation is to initiate […] a process of revision of his conviction;” and j) “given the specific circumstances of the case three publications [must] be ordered. Two of them corresponding to the operative part of the judgment, one [in] one of the country’s newspapers with highest circulation (El Comercio or el Universo) and another, also of the operative part, en one of Colombia’s newspapers with highest circulation. This last publication may even finally help, if it happens first, to inform Mr. […] Acosta Calderón that he his rights have been protected by this […] Court. The third one is a complete publication in the Official Newspaper;” Considerations of the Court 163. The Tribunal will now proceed to determine satisfaction measures to repair nonpecuniary damages, as well as measures that have a public impact.97 a) Publication of this Judgment 164. As determined in other cases,98 the Court considers that the State must publish at least once, in Ecuador’s official newspaper and in another newspaper of ample national circulation, both the section called “Proven Facts” as well as the operative part of this Judgment, without the corresponding footnotes. The publication must be made within a six-month period, as of the notification of the present Judgment. b) Elimination of Mr. Acosta Calderón’s criminal record from the public registries 165. As another satisfaction measure, the State must eliminate Mr. Acosta Calderón’s name from the public registries in which he appears with a criminal record in connection to the instant case. D) COSTS AND EXPENSES Arguments of the Commission 166. The Commission stated that “they are not aware of the financial arrangements between the alleged victim and his representatives and it does not know if they have received any kind of remuneration for their professional services.” Also, “it considers that the granting of reasonable costs, based on the information presented by the petitioners, is essential.” Arguments of the representatives 167. The representatives alleged that: a) the State must reimburse the costs and expenses paid by Mr. Acosta Calderón’s representatives “in the procedures before the Inter-American 97 Cfr. Case of Caesar, supra note 1, para. 129; Case of Huilca Tecse, supra note 88, para. 102; and Case of the Serrano Cruz Sisters, supra note 2, para. 165. 98 Cfr. Case of Huilca Tecse, supra note 88, para. 112; Case of the Serrano Cruz Sisters, supra note 2, para. 195; and Case of Carpio Nicolle et al., supra note 91, para. 123.