psychiatric care, from a psycho-social perspective;20 (d) satisfaction by means of actions in benefit of the victims or to honor their memory; 21 (e) guarantees of non-repetition of the violations,22 and (f) compensation for pecuniary and nonpecuniary damage. 23 10. More recently, in what could be held as a qualitative leap forward in our understanding of reparations for human rights violations in a setting of structural or systemic violations, the Court has held that in such a situation, reparations must serve a transformational purpose “in order to produce both a restorative and a corrective effect.” 24 III. ON COMPENSATORY INDEMNIFICATION FOR NONPECUNIARY DAMAGE 11. In cases of violation of the right to life, as in the instant case, it is patently impossible to satisfy restitutio in integrum, and therefore the Court has found alternative ways in its case law to offer the victims’ family members a form of restitution, such as material and intangible forms of indemnification.25 12. The definition of the scope and content of compensatory indemnification as a measure of reparation was settled in the well-known landmark decision on Velázquez Rodríguez v. Honduras. There the Court held that “[i]ndemnification for human rights violations is supported by international instruments of a universal and regional character”26 and emphasized that indemnification was, in fact, the usual and most common form of redress in international law, awarded both by the Human Rights Committee and the European Court of Human Rights.27 13. With respect to nonpecuniary damages specifically, the Court emphasized that they “may be awarded under international law and, in particular, in the case of human rights violations” 28 and that the principle of equity should be used in setting the appropriate amount of indemnity, because these damages cannot be quantified in monetary terms. Thus, the harm is assessed according to the circumstances of each individual case. Cf., inter alia, I/A Court HR. Case of the 19 Tradesmen v. Colombia. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of July 5, 2004. Series C No. 109, paras. 277 and 278 and operative paragraph 9, and Case of the Massacres of El Mozote and surrounding areas v. El Salvador. Merits, Reparations and Costs, supra, paras. 352 and 353 and operative paragraph 9. 20 In addition to building monuments, the Court’s more recent case law has ordered the production of a documentary video, as it finds that initiatives of this kind are significant both for the preservation of the memory and the satisfaction of the victims, and also for the recovery and restitution of the historical memory. I/A Court HR, Case of Rodríguez Vera et al. (the Disappeared from the Palace of Justice) v. Colombia. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 14, 2014. Series C No. 287, para. 579 and operative paragraph 5. 21 Cf., inter alia, I/A Court HR. Case of Garrido and Baigorria v. Argentina. Reparations and Costs, supra, para. 41, and Case of expelled Dominicans and Haitians v. Dominican Republic, supra, paras. 465 and 470, as well as operative paragraphs 7 and 20. 22 Cf., inter alia, I/A Court HR. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez v. Honduras. Repairs, supra, operative paragraphs 1, 2 and 3, and Case of Rochac Hernández et al. v. El Salvador. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of October 14, 2014. Series C No. 285, paras. 255 and 258 and operative paragraph 6. 23 I/A Court HR. Case of González et al. (“Cotton Field”) v. Mexico. Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 16, 2009. Series C No. 205, para. 450, and Case of Atala Riffo and daughters v. Chile. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of February 24, 2012. Series C No. 239, para. 267. 24 Cf. I/A Court HR. Case of Aloeboetoe et al. v. Suriname. Reparations and Costs. Judgment of September 10, 1993. Series C No. 15, paras. 46 and 50, and Case of Neira Alegría et al. v. Peru. Reparations and Costs. Judgment of September 19, 1996. Series C No. 29, para. 38. 25 26 I/A Court HR. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez v. Honduras. Reparations and Costs, supra, para. 28. 27 Cf. I/A Court HR. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez v. Honduras. Reparations and Costs, supra, para. 25. 28 I/A Court HR. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez v. Honduras. Reparations and Costs, supra, para. 27. 4