65 redress said injury.137 To this end, the Court has based itself on Article 63(1) of the American Convention, according to which, [i]f the Court finds that there has been a violation of a right or freedom protected by [the] 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. 188. As the Court has pointed out, Article 63(1) of the American Convention reflects a customary rule that is one of the key principles of contemporary international law regarding the responsibility of the States. Thus, when an unlawful event takes place that is attributable to a State, this immediately gives rise to the State’s international responsibility for the violation of an international rule, with the attendant duty of reparation and of making the consequences of the violation cease.138 189. Reparation of the damage caused by infringement of an international obligation requires, whenever possible, restitutio in integrum, which consisted of reestablishing the situation before the violation. If this is not possible, as in the instant case, this International Court must order adoption of a series of measures that, in addition to ensuring respect for the rights that were abridged, provide reparation of the consequences caused by the violations and pay compensation for the damages caused in the pertinent case.139 It is necessary to add the positive measures that the State must adopt to ensure that injurious acts such as of the instant case do not occur again.140 The obligation to redress, which is regulated in all its aspects (scope, nature, modes, and establishment of the beneficiaries) by international law, cannot be modified or not fulfilled by the obligated State by invoking domestic legal provisions.141 190. Reparations, as the term indicates, consist of the measures that tend to make the effects of the violations disappear or be mitigated. Their nature and their amount depend on the damage caused at both the pecuniary and non-pecuniary levels.142 In this regard, the reparations ordered must be related to the violations found in the previous chapters of this Judgment. A) BENEFICIARIES 191. The Court will now summarize the pleadings of the Inter-American Commission, of the representative of the victims and their next of kin, and of the State about who should be considered beneficiaries of the reparations to be ordered by the Court. Pleadings of the Commission 137 See Case of Maritza Urrutia, supra note 5, para. 141; Case of Myrna Mack Chang, supra note 5, para. 234; and Case of Bulacio, supra note 6, para. 70. 138 See Case of Maritza Urrutia, supra note 5, para. 142; Case of Myrna Mack Chang, supra note 5, para. 235; and Case of Bulacio, supra note 6, para. 71. 139 See Case of Maritza Urrutia, supra note 5, para. 143; Case of Myrna Mack Chang, supra note 5, para. 236; and Case of Bulacio, supra note 6, para. 72. 140 See Case of Maritza Urrutia, supra note 5, para. 144; Case of Bulacio, supra note 6, para. 73; and Case of Juan Humberto Sánchez, supra note 15, para. 150. 141 See Case of Maritza Urrutia, supra note 5, para. 143; Case of Myrna Mack Chang, supra note 5, para. 236; and Case of Bulacio, supra note 6, para. 72. 142 See Case of Myrna Mack Chang, supra note 5, para. 237.