7 documents submitted to the IRS showing the income of Nicholas Blake for the years 1981 and 1983, and mortality tables for the United States of America during the years 1985, 1987, 1992, and 1995). 26. On January 12, 1999, the State submitted documents pertaining to the exchange rate between the Quetzal and the United States dollar for the years 1985, 1987, 1992, and 1997, in accordance with information furnished by the Bank of Guatemala. (cfr. January 12, 1999, note from the Bank of Guatemala, and exchange rates from the financial market for the years 1992 and 1998). 27. The documents submitted by the relatives of Mr. Nicholas Blake and by the State were neither contested nor challenged, and therefore the Court accepts them as valid and orders their incorporation into the body of evidence. 28. The body of evidence of a case is unique and indivisible and is made up of the evidence submitted during all stages of the proceedings. For that reason, the statements made by Samuel and Richard Blake Jr., during the public hearing on the merits of the case held before this Court on April 17, 1997, also comprise part of the evidence that will be considered during the present stage, regardless of the request of the representatives of the relatives of Mr. Nicholas Blake. VI DUTY TO MAKE REPARATIONS 29. In operative paragraph four of the Judgment of January 24, 1998, the Court declared that Guatemala was “obligated to pay a fair compensation to the relatives of Mr. Nicholas Chapman Blake and reimburse them for the expenses incurred in their representations to the Guatemalan authorities in connection with this process” and in operative paragraph five of the same judgment it ordered that the reparations stage be opened. 30. In the matter of reparations, the applicable provision of the American Convention is Article 63(1) which prescribes that: [i]f the Court finds that there has been a violation of a right or freedom protected by this 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. 31. Reparations is a generic term that covers the various ways a State can redress the international responsibility it has incurred (restitutio in integrum, payment of compensation, satisfaction, guarantees that the violations will not be repeated, among others). (Loayza Tamayo Case, Reparations (Art. 63(1) American Convention on Human Rights), Judgment of November 27, 1998, Series C No. 43, para. 85; Castillo Páez Case, Reparations (Art. 63(1) American Convention on Human Rights), Judgment of November 27, 1998, Series C No. 43, para. 48, and Suárez Rosero Case, Reparations (Art. 63(1) American Convention on Human Rights), Judgment of January 20, 1999, Series C No. 44, para. 41). 32. The obligation to make reparation established by international courts is governed, as has been universally accepted, by international law in all its aspects: scope, nature, forms, and determination of beneficiaries, none of which the