31 enjoys “absolute and complete freedom.” The State further noted that its judicial branch was still considering a petition that the victim herself had filed seeking to have her police or criminal records expunged. 121. The Court has had before it one document issued by the Registry of Records and Convictions of the Supreme Court of Military Justice (supra 54) that concerns the first proceeding to which the victim was subjected. However, the Court does not have sufficient information in its possession to determine whether there are other records in which the victim figures. 122. Under Article 68 of the American Convention, the States Parties "undertake to comply with the judgment of the Court in any case to which they are parties. " Consequently, Peru is obligated to adopt all domestic legal measures that follow from the Court’s finding that the second trial to which the victim was subjected constituted a breach of the Convention. Hence, no conviction handed down in that second trial can have any legal effect, which is why all the respective proceedings and records are null and void. * * * 123. The State’s release of the victim is not sufficient to fully redress the consequences of the human rights violations perpetrated against her, given the length of time that she remained in prison, the suffering she endured as a result of the cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment to which she was subjected, and the fact that she was held incommunicado during her incarceration, paraded in prison uniform before the mass media, held in solitary confinement in a small, unventilated cell with no natural light, beaten and subjected to other forms of abuse such as threatened drowning, intimidation with threats of further violence, and restricted prison privileges (Loayza Tamayo Case, Judgment of September 17, 1997. Series C No. 33, para. 58). The consequences of that treatment cannot be fully redressed or compensated. 124. Alternative forms of reparation have to be found, such as pecuniary compensation for the victim and, where appropriate, her next of kin. This compensation is mainly for injuries suffered and, as this Court has ruled previously, includes pecuniary as well as moral damages (Garrido and Baigorria Case, Reparations, supra, para. 43). X PECUNIARY DAMAGES 125. In the case of pecuniary damages, in their reparations briefs both the victim and the Inter-American Commission requested that the Court order Peru to pay the following amounts: a) US$29,724 (twenty-nine thousand seven hundred twenty-four United States dollars) plus the legal interest on that amount, representing the income that the victim ceased to receive because of the events that resulted in her incarceration. On this matter, the State argued that for the duration of her detention, the victim had received a pension from the State as a former employee of the