76 and the representatives of the victims and their next of kin. These include: a) b) c) Reestablishment of the enjoyment of the right to a pension equalized with the salary of the SBS official occupying the same or a similar position to the one occupied by each of the pensioners at the time of their retirement; Compliance with the judgments delivered by the Constitutional and Social Law Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice and by the Constitutional Court, by payment of the part of the monthly pensions that was not paid to the victims from November 1992 to February 2002; and Annulment of article 5 of Decree Law No. 25792. 176. The Court considers that this attitude of the State of Peru makes a positive contribution towards settling this dispute. 177. As to the claim that the effects of article 5 of Decree Law No. 25792 should be annulled and made to cease “retroactively,” the Court considers that this claim no longer forms part of the dispute in the instant case, because the said decree has already been annulled and, also, the amounts of the pension that the victims had not received has been refunded, in the terms in which they had been receiving it prior to the arbitrary reductions. 178. With regard to the possible patrimonial consequences of the violation of the right to property, this Court considers that they should be established by the competent national organs, as provided for in the domestic legislation. 179. The claim that an impartial and effective investigation should be conducted into the prolonged failure to comply with the judicial rulings is admissible, so that the Court orders the State to conduct the corresponding investigations and apply the pertinent punishments to those responsible for disregarding the judicial rulings. 180. With regard to the other claims165, the Court considers that this judgment constitutes per se a form of reparation for the five pensioners166. Nevertheless, the Court considers that the facts that occurred in this case caused suffering to the pensioners, because their quality of life was diminished when their pensions were substantially reduced in an arbitrary manner, and the judicial rulings in their favor were not executed. Therefore, the Court considers that the non-pecuniary damage 165 The other claims of the Commission and the representatives of the victims and their next of kin are: payment of the interest corresponding to the amounts of the pensions which were not received as of November 1992; compensation for pecuniary damage; public acknowledgement of international responsibility and a public apology, and the publication of both in two newspapers with extensive national circulation; the setting up of a “Study Group” on the adjustment of domestic social security legislation to Peru’s international obligations, and the establishment of a “National Pensioners Day.” 166 Cf. Trujillo Oroza case. Reparations, supra note 4, para. 83; “The Last Temptation of Christ” case (Olmedo Bustos et al.), supra note 161, para. 99; and the Constitutional Court case, supra note 151, para. 122.