142 have been victims of forced internal displacement (supra para. 189), as victims of abridgment of the right embodied in Article 22(1) of the American Convention, in combination with Articles 4(1), 5(1), 19 and 1(1) of that same Convention; all the boys and girls who are next of kin of the individuals who were executed or made to disappear and/or who have suffered displacement, as victims of abridgment of the right embodied in Article 19 of the American Convention, in combination with Articles 22(1), 4(1), 5(1) and 1(1) of that same Convention (supra para. 163). All of them will be entitled to the reparations set by the Court, with regard to non-pecuniary and/or pecuniary damages. 257. The next of kin of the victims will be entitled to the reparations set by the Court, as victims themselves of the violations found regarding the Convention, as well as of those set by the Court as injured parties due to the violations committed against the approximately 49 victims recognized by the State. In this regard: a) in accordance with its jurisprudence,279 this Court deems that the next of kin of the victims referred to in a document issued by a competent authority –a birth certificate, death certificate, or identification card-, or those recognized as such in domestic proceedings, have been identified; and b) with regard to the other next of kin who have not been adequately identified or at least individually listed in this proceeding, the Court deems that the compensation due to each must be granted in the same manner set forth with regard to those who have been duly identified, in the understanding that they must appear before the official mechanisms that will be established for this purpose, in accordance with the instant Judgment (infra para. 311), within 24 months of when it was notified, and they must prove their relationship or kinship with the victim, through sufficient means of identification or by means of two attesting witnesses, as the case may be.280 258. On the other hand, this Court must mention that the evidence supplied by the representatives and by the Commission, as well as the evidence requested by the Court to facilitate adjudication, refers to other next of kin who could be victims of displacement and of abridgment of the right to humane treatment and of the rights of the child. For example, the children of Luz Mery Pinzón López; Elvina or Elsy Delfina Vaca, mother of Omar Patiño Vaca and Eliécer Martínez Vaca; the four children of Zuli Herrera Contreras, as well as the five children of Viviana Barrera. The Court does not know why the representatives did not mention said persons as beneficiaries of the reparations and did not supply enough evidence for the Court to individually identify them, if that were the case. Therefore, these victims will be able to resort to the official mechanism established for them to receive the respective (infra para. 311). 279 See Case of the Moiwana Community, supra note 4, para. 178, and Case of the Plan de Sánchez Massacre. Reparations (Art. 63(1) American Convention on Human Rights). Judgment of November 19, 2004. Series C No. 116, para. 63. 280 See Case of the Moiwana Community, supra note 4, para. 178, and Case of the Plan de Sánchez Massacre. Reparations, supra note 279, para. 67.