C. Measures of satisfaction C.1. Publication of the relevant parts of the present Judgment and public dissemination C.2. Public apology and public acknowledgment of international responsibility D. Compensatory damages D.1. Pecuniary damage D.1.1. Arguments of the parties D.1.2. Considerations of the Court D.2. Non-pecuniary damage D.2.1. Arguments of the parties D.2.2. Considerations of the Court E. Other claims for reparation F. Costs and expenses F.1. Arguments of the parties F.2. Considerations of the Court G. Method of compliance with the ordered payments 124-127 124-125 X. OPERATIVE PARAGRAPHS 152 126-127 128-137 128 129-130 131-132 133 134 135-137 138-139 140-145 141 142-145 146-151 I INTRODUCTION TO THE CASE AND PURPOSE OF THE CONTROVERSY 1. On February 24, 2010, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Inter-American Commission” or “the Commission”), in accordance with Articles 51 and 61 of the Convention, filed an application against the Republic of Ecuador (hereinafter “the State” or “Ecuador”) before the Tribunal in case No. 11.535. The initial petition was presented before the Commission on November 8, 1994, by the Ecumenical Human Rights Commission (Comisión Ecuménica de Derechos Humanos, hereinafter “CEDHU,” its acronym in Spanish). On August 6, 2009, the Inter-American Commission approved Report on admissibility and merits No. 82/09 (hereinafter “the Report”), in which it declared the case admissible and made several recommendations for the State. The State was notified of this Report on August 24, 2009. After the State submitted certain information, and after a deadline extension was granted and another requested, and “[a]fter considering the available information indicating that the State has not complied with the recommendations made in the report on admissibility and merits,” the Inter-American Commission decided to submit this case to the Tribunal. The Commission designated Ms. Luz Patricia Mejía, Commissioner, and Mr. Santiago A. Canton, Executive Secretary, as Delegates, and Elizabeth Abi-Mershed, Deputy Executive Secretary, and Silvia Serrano and Nerea Aparicio, attorneys of the Executive Secretariat, as legal advisors. 2. The application relates to the alleged “lack of adequate medical attention; physical and psychological suffering; and subsequent death of Pedro Miguel Vera Vera while under State custody.” The Commission indicated that “the facts have not yet been resolved, nor have those responsible been identified and punished.” 3