39 1995 through 2005 and 2007,167 as well as for fines corresponding to the years 2000 through 2005 and 2007, this Court considers that the taxes and fines must be refunded as of 1995, according to how the payments for these were made pursuant with the receipts presented. 124. According to the aforementioned, the amount collected for the taxes and fines ascends to US$ 32,799.04 (thirty two thousand seven hundred and ninety nine dollars of the United States of America with four cents). Given that the State acknowledged the payment of interests, without specifying their type, this Tribunal considers that a simple interest be applied on the mentioned amount based on the Libor rate from the year 1995 to the month of February 2011, which results in the amount of US$10,300.06 (ten thousand and three hundred dollars of the United States of America and six cents). Therefore, the Court considers that the State must return to Mrs. María Salvador Chiriboga, in cash, the total amount of US$43,099.10 (forty three thousand, ninety-nine dollars of the United States of America and ten cents) for the taxes and fines wrongfully collected, and the corresponding interests, within a six-month term computed as of the notification of the present Judgment. 2. Satisfaction 125. The Tribunal will determine the measures of satisfaction that seek to repair nonpecuniary damages and that had no pecuniary nature, reason for which it will order measures of a public scope or repercussion.168 The State did not refer to this. a) Publication of the Judgment 126. The representatives requested as a reparation measure for the victim the publication “of the text of the judgment issued in each of the newspaper of greatest circulation in the country and in the Official Registry.” The State did not refer to this subject. 127. As has been stated by this Court in other cases169 as a measure of satisfaction, the State must publish in the Official Newspaper, for a single time, paragraphs 1 to 12, 44 to 46, 54, 60, 63, 65, 69 to 91, 95 to 100, 103 to 118, 123, 124, 129, 133 and 134 of the Judgment issued on May 6, 2008 and paragraphs 2, 3, 32 to 36, 44 to 85, 93 to 104, 111, 112, 122 to 124, 127, 129, 131, 141 of the present Judgment, all of them including the names of each chapter and the corresponding section –without the footnotes- as well as the operative paragraphs of both Judgments, and in another newspaper of ample circulation the official summary prepared by the Court, which includes the relevant aspects of the Judgment on the Merits and the present Judgment. A six-month term, computed as of the notification of this Judgment, is granted for these publications. b) Request for a public act of acknowledgment of international responsibility 167 Cf. Receipts No. 2725375, 3579189,3786825, 0077424,153966,153967, 1446587, 1446588, 2936421, 2936422, 3511129, 3511130, 3965322, 3965323, 5081948, 5081949, 6939203, and 6939204 (case file of annexes to the brief of motions and pleadings, annex 56, folios 3187 to 3211, and case file of evidence to better resolve presented by the representatives, folio 7166). It is important to note that after the review of the receipts submitted by the representatives, the Court has found that the correct amount of receipt No. 2936421 is of US$874.45 (eight hundred and seventy-four dollars of the United States of America and forty-five cents) (case file of annexes to the brief of motions and pleadings of the representatives, annex 56, folio 3191). 168 Cf. 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 Manuel Cepeda Vargas V. Colombia. Preliminary Objections, Merits and Reparations. Judgment of May 26, 2010. Series C No. 213, para. 219, and Case of Vélez Loor V. Panamá, supra note 19, para. 261. 169 Cf. Case of Barrios Altos V. Perú. Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 30, 2001. Series C No. 87, Operative Paragraph 5.d); Case of Gomes Lund et al. (“Guerrilha do Araguaia”) V. Brazil, supra note 8, para. 273, and Case of Cabrera García and Montiel Flores V. México, supra note 8, para. 217.