193. Thus, the Court holds that, with respect to the death of Olimpiades Gonzalez and the corresponding investigation, the State is not responsible for the violation of Article 5(1) of the Convention, to the detriment of María Angélica González, Belkis Mirelis González, Fernando González, Luis Guillermo González, Wilmer Antonio Barliza González or Aura González. VIII REPARATIONS 194. On the basis of Article 63(1) of the American Convention, as well as in relation with its Article 28, the Court has indicated that any violation of an international obligation that has caused harm entails the duty to make adequate reparation and that this provision reflects a customary norm that constitutes one of the fundamental principles of contemporary international law on State responsibility.176 The Court has considered the need to provide different types of reparation so as to fully redress the damages. Therefore, in addition to pecuniary measures, other measures such as satisfaction, restitution, rehabilitation, and guarantees of non-repetition have special relevance.177 It has also established that the reparations must have a causal nexus with the facts of the case, the violations declared and the proven damages, as well as the measures requested to redress them.178 195. Bearing in mind the violations to the American Convention, the Court will analyze the claims presented by the Commission and the representatives, as well as the arguments of the State. With respect to the position of Venezuela, it must be mentioned that it did not refer in a timely fashion to all of the requested measures of reparations. The State requested, in its answering brief, that the Court “declare as inappropriate the request for reparations and compensation of the Commission and the representatives.” A) Injured parties 196. The Court considers an “injured party” to be, in the terms of Article 63(1) of the Convention, anyone who has been declared a victim of a violation of a right recognized in the Convention. Therefore, it considers the injured parties to be Olimpiades González, María Angélica González, Belkis Mirelis González, Fernando González, Luis Guillermo González, Wilmer Antonio Barliza González and Aura González. According to information provided by the representatives, in addition to Olimpiades González, Wilmer Antonio Barliza González are deceased. B) Obligation to investigate 197. The Commission requested that the Court order the State “to make available the necessary measures to investigate exhaustively, diligently and in a timely fashion all of the responsibilities arising from the death of Olimpiades González.” Cf. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez v. Honduras. Reparations and Costs. Judgment of July 21, 1989. Series C No. 7, para. 25 and Case of Garzón Guzmán et al. v. Ecuador, para. 95. 176 Cf. Case of the Las Dos Erres Massacre Vs. Guatemala, Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 24, 2009. Series C No. 211, para. 226 and Case of Ríos Avalos et al. v. Paraguay, para. 179. 177 Cf. Case of Ticona Estrada et al. v. Bolivia. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 27, 2008. Series C No. 191, para. 110 and Case of Ríos Avalos et al. v. Paraguay, para. 179. 178 48