20 her personal integrity, this is not the meaning of the cited provision of the Convention. In essence, Article 5 refers to the rule that nobody should be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman, or degrading punishment or treatment, and that all persons deprived of their liberty must be treated with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person. It has not been demonstrated that the three persons to whom this matter refers had been subjected to cruel treatment or that the Peruvian authorities had damaged their dignity during the time that they were being detained at the San Juan Bautista Prison. Nor is there proof that said persons would have been deprived of the judicial guarantees to which Article 8 of the Convention refers during the proceedings brought against them. 87. The Court must express its position concerning the court costs and attorneys' fees of these proceedings. In this respect, it would be appropriate to insist that the Commission cannot demand that expenses incurred as a result of its own internal work structure be reimbursed through the assessment of costs. The operation of the human rights organs of the American System is funded by the Member States by means of their annual contributions. (Aloeboetoe et al. Case, Reparations (Article 63(1) American Convention on Human Rights), Judgment of September 10, 1993. Series C No. 15, para. 114.) 88. However, the Court must sentence Peru to the pay the expenditures that the victims' next of kin may have incurred during these proceedings, which determination shall be left to the Government and the Commission, the Court reserving the right to determine them should the parties not reach an agreement. 89. Article 63(1) of the Convention states as follows: 1. If the Court finds that there has been a violation of a right or freedom protected by this Convention, the Court shall rule that the injured party be ensured the enjoyment of his right or freedom that was violated. It shall also rule, if appropriate, that the consequences of the measure or situation that constituted the breach of such right or freedom be remedied and that fair compensation be paid to the injured party. In the current circumstances it is clear that the Court may not rule that the victims be guaranteed the enjoyment of the rights of which they were deprived. It is then only appropriate to determine the reparation of the consequences of the violation and the payment of fair compensation. 90. The Court lacks the elements of judgment that would enable it to determine the extent of the compensation, as such information was neither submitted by the parties nor discussed during the proceedings. Therefore, the Court shall limit itself to the passing of an in genere judgment, leaving its determination in the hands of the parties. Should the parties not reach an agreement, the final decision shall be made by the Court. X 91. Therefore, THE COURT, unanimously