82 to the household budget and is perfectly adequate to compensate for the loss suffered, thus avoiding unjust enrichment. c) In relation to non-pecuniary damage: i. Albertina Viana-Lopes filed a civil action for “moral damages” against private individuals rather than the State. Such proceeding was stayed until the criminal case would be adjudicated. There is a possibility of bis in idem occurring in the instant case, provided that damages are awarded in the civil action and the defendant pays compensation and the Court simultaneously orders the State to pay compensation for “moral damages” to Mrs. VianaLopes. Therefore, the same loss would thus be twice compensated for; ii. Mr. Cosme Ximenes-Lopes has not learned of the death of his brother, and there can be no moral damage caused by that which is unnoticed; iii. Irene Ximenes-Lopes-Miranda cannot be considered to be directly affected, as she did not have a close relationship with Mr. Damião XimenesLopes. iv. Damião Ximenes-Lopes’ father had no father-to-son relationship with the victim, so he is not entitled to any compensation for non-pecuniary damage; v. Mr. Damião Ximenes-Lopes had nine siblings. In accordance with the concept of “fair justice,” payment of compensation for moral damage to only two siblings is inadmissible. There is no way to measure the grief suffered when a next of kin dies, so in assessing the reparation of the pain and suffering, a judge should use the same criteria for all the siblings, and vi. it has recognized the existence of “moral damages” and its duty to provide monetary compensation for Mr. Damião Ximenes-Lopes’ mother, so it has paid just compensation in the domestic system, through the payment of a state death pension in addition to the federal government death pension for the life of Albertina Viana-Lopes, both of which should be considered by the Court. Mrs. Viana-Lopes has already been compensated for the moral and pecuniary damage caused. The rest of the victim’s next of kin identified by the Commission and the representatives are naturally eligible to be awarded the remaining forms of reparation. d) In relation to other forms of reparation, the State argued that it had adopted all steps expected from a constitutional democratic State in order to prevent events such as those suffered by Mr. Damião Ximenes-Lopes from happening again. It has adopted several measures in the Municipality of Sobral, among which are the specialized units for the treatment of persons with a variety of diseases. Likewise, it has adopted, inter alia, measures at the domestic level, such as passing Law No. 10,216 in 2001, known as the “Law of Psychiatric Reform;” it has held a seminar on the “Right to Mental Health — regulation and application of Law No. 10,216,” and implemented several programs concerning health services. Finally, the State pointed out that it has made symbolic reparations by renaming the Sobral Psychosocial Care Center (CAPS) after the victim, “Damião Ximenes-Lopes Psychosocial Care Center,” holding the Third National Mental Health Conference at the now named Damião Ximenes-Lopes Hall, and publicly stating at the hearing held before the Court, the partial recognition of its international liability for the violation of rights set forth in Articles 4 and 5 of the American Convention. e) In relation to the expenses and court costs, it argued that there are no grounds for compensating the next of kin of Mr. Damião Ximenes-Lopes at