92 José Mancuello Bareiro, and Rodolfo and Benjamín Ramírez Villalba at the time of the facts. However, taking into account the activities the victims performed as a means of subsistence, and also the circumstances and characteristics of this case, the Court establishes, based on the equity principle, the following amounts for loss of earnings: US$100,000.00 (one hundred thousand United States dollars) in favor of Agustín Goiburú; US$50,000.00 (fifty thousand United States dollars) in favor of Carlos José Mancuello Bareiro; US$50,000.00 (fifty thousand United States dollars) in favor of Benjamín Ramírez Villalba, and US$35,000.00 (thirty-five thousand United States dollars) in favor of Rodolfo Ramírez Villalba. These amounts must be delivered in accordance with paragraph 148 of this judgment. C) NON-PECUNIARY DAMAGE 156. Non-pecuniary damage can include the suffering and hardship caused to the direct victim and his next of kin, the harm of objects of value that are very significant to the individual, and also changes, of a non-pecuniary nature, in the living conditions of the victim or his family. Since it is not possible to allocate a precise monetary equivalent for non-pecuniary damage, it can only be compensated, in order to provide comprehensive reparation to the victims, by the payment of a sum of money or the delivery of goods or services with a monetary value, which the Court determines by the reasonable exercise of judicial discretion and based on the principle of equity; and also by acts or projects with public recognition or repercussion, which have the effect of acknowledging the dignity of the victims, and avoiding the repetition of the human rights violations.96 The first aspect of the reparation of non-pecuniary damage will be examined in this section and the second in section D) of this chapter. 157. As the Court has indicated in other cases,97 the non-pecuniary damage inflicted on Agustín Goiburú Giménez, Carlos José Mancuello Bareiro, and Rodolfo and Benjamín Ramírez Villalba is evident, because it is inherent in human nature that all those subjected to arbitrary detention, incommunicado, torture and forced disappearance experienced intense suffering, anguish, terror, and feelings of powerlessness and insecurity; hence, this damage does not have to be proved. 158. As has been established, before being disappeared, Agustín Goiburú Giménez, Carlos José Mancuello Bareiro, and Rodolfo and Benjamín Ramírez Villalba were illegally deprived of their liberty and subjected to torture while they were detained. In this regard, Dr. Goiburú experienced persecution by the dictatorship of General Stroessner for several years, and this caused him to live in exile. Even before his final detention and subsequent disappearance, he had been the object of severe harassment and, even abduction. After he had been detained, Dr. Goiburú was transferred from Argentina to Paraguay where he remained detained and subjected to tortures, such as the “pileteada” [immersion in a tank of water]. Carlos José Mancuello Bareiro and Benjamín and Rodolfo Ramírez Villalba were detained for 22 months during which they were subjected to tortures, including the “teyurugay” and the “pileteada.” The next of kin of these persons have suffered harm as a result of 96 Cf.. Case of Montero-Aranguren et al. (Detention Center of Catia), supra note 3, para. 130; Case of Ximenes Lopes, supra note 8, para. 227, and Case of the Ituango Massacres, supra note 1, para. 383. 97 Cf. Case of the Ituango Massacres, supra note 1, para. 384; Case of the Pueblo Bello Massacre, supra note 5, para. 255, and Case of the “Mapiripán Massacre”, supra note 2, para. 283.