464. When ruling on the violations verified in this case in relation to the measures of pre-trial detention to which the victims were subject, the Court took into account that the grounds of danger to “the security of society” stipulated in article 363 of the former Code of Criminal Procedure and in article 140.c of the Criminal Procedural Code of 2000, which are open-ended, were applied to the eight victims without an analysis of the need that justified the measure based on a procedural risk in the specific case (supra paras. 363 and 364). Consequently, the Court does not find it pertinent to order Chile to adapt its domestic law, because the violations of the right to personal liberty verified in this Judgment resulted from the judicial interpretation and application of the said norms. Nevertheless, the Court recalls that the judicial authorities should apply the criteria and standards established in the Court’s case law (supra paras. 307 to 312) in exercise of control of conventionality, in order to ensure that the measure of pre-trial detention is always adopted in keeping with these parameters. d) Other measures requested 465. The Commission asked the Court to order the State to “[a]dopt measures of nonrepetition to eradicate the discriminatory prejudices based on ethnic origin in the exercise of public power and, most especially, in the administration of justice.” CEJIL asserted that, given that “[s]ome of the violations […] in this case are explained by the unfamiliarity with the standards of international law of the administrators of justice,” the State should “increase substantially the training offered to the agents of the security forces – in particular, the members of the Investigative Police of the Carabineros – the members of the Judiciary and the Public Prosecution Service, and other State officials, on the rights of the indigenous peoples in order to avoid the repetition of discriminatory biases in the application of the law.” In addition, it requested “that the legal reforms be complemented by education and training activities on the implications of the Judgment and the standards derived from it, for the different agents involved in the protection of rights,” and that this “should include the National Human Rights Institute as the State agency responsible for the design and implementation of this measure.” It alleged that one way of reversing “[t]he historical situation of disadvantage of the indigenous peoples in Chile in general, and the Mapuche People in particular,” as well as the prejudices and stereotypes that exist in the State with regard to the members of indigenous peoples, “is the design and implementation of an effective public policy that instills respect for the contribution of the indigenous peoples [and the Mapuche culture] to national development. To this end, it ask[ed] the Court to require the State to design and implement an awareness-raising campaign on the issue, including the National Human Rights Institute in its execution.” The FIDH asked that the State be order to implement a “communication campaign that underscores the value of the Mapuche People and the importance of their survival.” 466. The FIDH also asked the Court to order the State “to restitute the ancestral lands to the Mapuche people” in order “not to perpetuate the State’s actions aimed at condemning representatives of the Mapuche people for their political demands.”440 It also asked that Chile be ordered “to investigate and sanction those responsible for these violations”; specifically, that it “sanction the judges and prosecutors who participated in the violation of the human rights of the victims.” In addition, the FIDH, among its arguments on non-pecuniary damage, affirmed that “the only way to repair the consequences of [the] violations [in this case] is to seek measures that considers the Mapuche community as a whole,” and to this end, it requested the “creation of a fund to be administered by the communities to which the petitioners belong, destined for the education of Mapuche children,” because it considered that the harm to the cultural and moral integrity of the community “can be repaired by the transfer of ancestral knowledge to the children as a way of maintaining the cultural integrity of the people.” 440 Specifically, they “requested the establishment of a plan for the restitution of land” to the José Guillón, José Millacheo, José María Cabul, Temulemu and Norín Communities, to which the victims and their families belong. 150