68 institutions.263 Furthermore, when providing such treatment, the circumstances and the particular necessities of each victim shall be considered, in a manner in which they receive family and individual treatments, according to that agreed upon by each one of them and after their individual evaluation.264 C4. Guarantees of non-repetition 257. The representatives requested that this Tribunal order the State to modify the dispositions regarding the procedures of absence and death alleged so as to adapt them to international standards, and move forward with the projects that have been pending since 2007. Likewise, they requested that the State modify the PNR structure, in order to make it into a program of legal nature, independent from the executive’s discretion, as a “State plan, and not as a government plan subject to the particularities of each government period.” Furthermore, they requested that “steps be taken to improve aspects in which the PNR has been highly ineffective, such as impunity, land recuperation, and victim identification.” 258. Regarding the procedures of absence and death alleged, the State, in its final written arguments, emphasized its concept and performance, and concluded that “in Guatemala, [such procedures] have been carried out by […] the next of kin of disappeared persons, that have been, for the most part, solved favorably, however, it is considered that, as it is currently regulated, the process of absence and alleged death does not respond to the Guatemalan social reality, a consequence of the internal armed conflict that lasted 36 years, as it was established by the Court […] in the Molina Theissen case.” 259. Regarding the PNR, the State pointed out that it appeals to several measures to achieve an integral reparation fois the victims of the internal armed conflict.265 In the same sense, it manifested that “the programs […] have been created according to its economic possibilities, [and that its] interest and political will has always been expressed.” Therefore, it stated that “the hard work that has been carried out is reflected through the [PNR] and the advancements that have been accomplished as a result of the management of its actual administration [, to which it considered] that the claims of the petitioners in this sense are unfounded.” The State requested that the Court “take note of the great advancements […] through such program, as a mechanism for the attention and reparation which the petitioners have not yet used.” 260. The Court notices that in the present case it has not ruled on the merits regarding the provisions of domestic law regarding the forced disappearance and absence and alleged death, as well as the modification of the PNR, and as such it is not possible to establish reparations in that sense. Nevertheless, the Court observes that, regarding the dispositions of domestic law, regarding the procedure of absence and alleged death, the Court ruled on this in the Case of Molina Theissen v. Guatemala, and continues evaluating the fulfillment of 263 Cf. Case Barrios Altos V. Perú, supra note 256, paras. 42 a 45; Case Radilla Pacheco V. México, supra note 12, para. 358, and Case of the Dos Erres Massacre v. Guatemala, supra note 12, para. 270. 264 Cf. Case 19 Comerciantes V. Colombia. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of 5 of July of 2004. Series C No. 109, para. 278; Case Radilla Pacheco V. México, supra note 12, para. 358, and Case Dos Erres Massacre V. Guatemala, supra note 12, para. 270. 265 It pointed out, that those measures include: 1. Dignification of the victims; 2. Cultural redress; 3. Psychosocial Reparation; 4. Material Restitutin, and 5. Economic redress.