49 failure to comply with the obligations established in Articles 1(1), 2 and 28 [of the Convention] generated loss of earnings, since they are general obligations.” 186. As the Court has indicated, reparations must have a causal connection with the facts of the case, the alleged violations, the proven damage, and the measures requested to repair the corresponding damage. Therefore, the Court must observe this series of factors in order to rule appropriately and in accordance with law.148 In the instant case, the Court did not examine the State’s responsibility for the death of Sétimo Garibaldi, since this was outside the Court’s temporal competence (supra para. 22), so that it cannot order measures designed to repair damage arising from Mr. Garibaldi’s death. The measures of reparation must be related to the facts which violate the Convention that have been declared in this judgment; namely, the errors and omissions in the Police Investigation. 187. Bearing in mind the above, the Court establishes, in equity, the sum of US$1,000 (one thousand United States dollars) with regard to the transport expenses incurred and the measures taken by Iracema Garibaldi when seeking the support of her family in other localities. 188. Regarding the expenses for national and international litigation alleged by the representatives, the Court will consider them in the section corresponding to costs and expenses as it has in previous cases.149 ii) Non-pecuniary damage 189. The Court has developed the concept of circumstances in which it should be compensated.150 non-pecuniary damage and the 190. The Commission stated that, in the instant case, “the victims endured mental suffering, anguish, uncertainty and changes in their life, owing to the denial of justice in relation to the murder of Mr. Garibaldi.” It asked the Court to establish, based on the equity principle, the amount of the compensation for non-pecuniary damage. 191. In their pleadings and motions brief, the representatives indicated that the financial damage caused to Mr. Garibaldi’s family was irreparable from a financial viewpoint, because their living conditions before the facts could never be restored. The financial compensation, together with other forms of reparation, could help the family build a new life project. They indicated that the Court has considered that the next of kin are victims when their right to physical and moral integrity is harmed as a result of violations perpetrated against their loved ones, and of the continuing suffering caused when State agents, by act or omission, fail to investigate the facts and hold the perpetrators responsible. In their final arguments brief, they requested the sum of US$280,000.00 (two hundred and eighty thousand United States dollars), to be divided proportionately between Mr. Garibaldi’s next of kin. 192. The State affirmed that the Court’s judgment alone constituted a form of moral satisfaction, and that it was not appropriate to raise the issue of pecuniary compensation. 148 Cf. Case of Ticona Estrada et al., supra note 98, para. 110. 149 Cf. Kimel v. Argentina. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of May 2, 2008. Series C No. 177, para. 109; Case of Tristán Donoso, supra note 9, para. 184, and Case of Ticona Estrada et al., supra note 98, para. 124. 150 The Court has established that non-pecuniary damage “can include the suffering and hardship caused to the direct victim and to his next of kin, the harm to values that are very significant for the individual, as well as changes of a non-pecuniary nature in the living conditions of the victim or his family.” The case of the “Street Children” (Villagrán Morales et al. v. Guatemala. Reparations and costs. Judgment of May 26, 2001. Series C No. 77, para. 84; Case of Escher et al., supra note 9, para. 229, and Case of Reverón Trujillo, supra note 30, para. 175.