116 Considerations of the Court 242. The Court will now determine the person or persons who are the “injured party” in the instant case, pursuant to the terms of Article 63(1) of the American Convention. In view of the fact that the violations to the American Convention found by the Court in the instant Judgment were committed against Myrna Mack Chang, Lucrecia Hernández Mack, Yam Mack Coy, deceased, Zoila Chang Lau, Helen Mack Chang, Marco Mack Chang, Freddy Mack Chang, and Ronald Chang Apuy, all of them –as victims- must be included in said category and be entitled to the reparations ordered by the Court, both regarding pecuniary damage, when appropriate, and regarding non-pecuniary damage. With respect to the deceased victim, Myrna Mack Chang, it will also be necessary to determine which reparations ordered in her favor are transmissible. 243. The provision of Article 2(15) of the Rules of Procedure278 should be underlined, as regards the necessary breadth of the concept of “next of kin of the victim.” Said concept includes all persons linked by close kinship, including the parents, children and siblings, who might have the right to compensation, insofar as the fulfill the requirements set forth in the case law of this Court. Regarding this point, we must highlight the criterion followed by the Court of assuming that the death of an individual causes non-pecuniary damage to the closest members of the family, especially those who were in close emotional contact with the victim,279 a situation that will be determined in the respective chapter. 244. It has also been proven that Ronald Chang Apuy, first cousin of the victim, was raised by the Mack Chang family since he was a small child and is considered one more member of the family. Therefore, the Court deems that Ronald Chang Apuy will be assimilated to the status of sibling and it assumes that he could not be indifferent to what happened to Myrna Mack Chang, for which reason the acts in violation of the Convention set forth in this Judgment also affected him and he must be considered a beneficiary of the reparations. 245. With respect to Vivian Mack Chang, this Court deems that, even though she has not participated in the instant proceeding, personally or through a representative, it has been proven that she is a sister of the victim. Therefore, the Court assumes that she has undergone the same suffering as the rest of the family, for which reason she must also be a beneficiary of reparations. XIV REPARATIONS 246. In accordance with the evidence gathered during the proceeding and in light of the criteria set forth by this Court in its case law, the Court will now analyze the claims of the parties regarding this matter, so as to determine the measures of reparation pertaining to pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and other forms of reparation. 278 Pursuant to Article 2 of the Rules of Procedure, the term “next of kin” means “the immediate family, that is, the direct ascendants and descendants, siblings, spouses or permanent companions, or those determined by the Court, if applicable.” 279 Cf. Bulacio Case, supra note 9, para. 78; Juan Humberto Sánchez Case, supra note 9, para. 156; Las Palmeras Case. Reparations, supra note 10, para. 54 and 55.