85 C) NON-PECUNIARY DAMAGE 227. Non-pecuniary damage may comprise pain and suffering, the detriment of values highly significant for the individuals and non-monetary alterations in the victims’ living conditions. Since it is impossible to ascertain the accurate monetary value of non-monetary damage, there are only two alternatives for the integral compensation of victims. Firstly, through the payment of a sum of money or the delivery of goods or services that may be measurable in monetary terms, which the Court shall determine through the reasonable exercise of its judicial discretion and on equitable grounds. Secondly, through public works or acts intended, inter alia, to commemorate and dignify the victims as well as to avoid the repetition of human rights violations. 153153 228. In the instant case, this Court has declared that the State is responsible for violating the rights enshrined in Articles 4(1) and 5(1) and 5(2) of the American Convention, to the detriment of Mr. Damião Ximenes-Lopes; in Article 5 of the Convention, against Albertina Viana-Lopes, Irene Ximenes-Lopes and Francisco Leopoldino Lopes and Cosme Ximenes-Lopes; and Articles 8(1) and 25(1) of the Convention, against Albertina Viana-Lopes and Irene Ximenes-Lopes, all in relation to Article 1(1) of said Convention. Therefore, the State must compensate Mr. Ximenes-Lopes and his next of kin for the damage caused. 229. Before determining the reparations applicable in the instant case, this Court deems it appropriate to address the civil action for damages filed by Albertina VianaLopes with the domestic courts, and the life pension established by the state of Ceará through Law No. 13,491 and granted to Albertina Viana-Lopes (supra para. 112(69)). 230. In relation to the civil action for damages, the State argued that the Court must prevent bis in idem from happening, which would occur if the civil action for damages were allowed by a domestic court and the Court decided to order the State to pay compensation for non-pecuniary damages to Albertina Viana-Lopes. Therefore, according to the State, the same loss would thus be twice compensated for. In addition, it pointed out that the action for damages was filed against private individuals rather than the State. 231. In that regard, the Court considers that the victims or their next of kin retain the right to claim compensation from the private individuals who may be responsible for the loss. In the instant case, Albertina Viana-Lopes exercised such rights in filing the civil action for damages, which is still pending resolution. 232. Due to the international liability incurred by the State, the latter has a new legal duty: the obligation to make reparations, 154 which is different from the 153 Cf. Case of Baldeón-García, supra note 4, para. 188; Case of Sawhoyamaxa Indigenous Community, supra nota 4 para. 219; and Case of Acevedo Jaramillo et al., supra note 4, para. 308. 154 Cf. Case of Baldeón-García, supra note 4, para. 175; Case of Sawhoyamaxa Indigenous Community, supra note 4 para. 196; and Case of Baena Ricardo et al. Competence. Judgment of November 28, 2003. Series C No 104, para. 65.