109 favor of each of the next of kin considered victims in the present Judgment (supra para. 251). The compensation offered in the present Judgment, shall not pose an obstacle to the other reparations that, eventually, could be issued in the domestic law. 2. Non-pecuniary damage 305. The Court has developed in its jurisprudence the concept of non-pecuniary damage and the assumptions under which it must be compensated. The Court has established that non-pecuniary damage consists of “the suffering and the harm caused to the direct victims and their relatives, the erosion of values of great significance to people, as well as the alterations of a non-pecuniary nature, in the living conditions of the victim or the victim’s family.”401 306. The Commission requested the Court to, heading to the nature of this case, establish a sum in equity for the compensation of non-pecuniary damage. 307. The representatives noted that moral damage should be subject to an established monetary compensation based on standards of equity. The victims were detained without legal formalities or judicial controls; they were taken to military bases were they were tortured and then disappeared, to which they requested that for each disappeared person and for Maria Lúcia Petit da Silva, based on moral damage, the Court establish a sum of US $100,000.00 (one hundred thousand dollars of the United States of America). On the other hand, regarding the next of kin of the victims, they considered that the enforced disappearances generated anguish, insecurity, frustration, and defenselessness, given the omission of the public authorities to investigate the facts. As such, they requested that in establishing the sum for compensation, the Court consider factors such as the type of crime, the failure to identify those responsible, and the impact on the life plan and physical and mental health of the next of kin of the victims, such as the following circumstances: a) lack of knowledge regarding the whereabouts of the victims; b) recognition of responsibility by the State more than 20 years after the facts took place; c) the impossibility of accessing justice and the lack of information; d) the denial of justice for more than 30 years; e) the public declarations of soldiers affirming that they had tortured and executed the victims without there being any further investigation, and f) the declarations against the honor of the disappeared victims. As a consequence, they requested US $80,000.00 (eighty thousand dollars of the United States of America) for each of the next of kin of the victims. 308. The State highlighted that, in addition to the payment of pecuniary compensation in the framework of Law No. 9.140/95, several acts of a symbolic and educational nature were carried out, which promoted the recovery of memory and the truth of the facts that occurred during the military regime. 309. The Court has held that the monetary reparations ordered in the domestic forum “of a reparative purpose” for the enforced disappearances are appropriate in the present case. As such, it will not order the payment of additional sums for the concept of non-pecuniary damage suffered by the victims of enforced disappearance. 310. On the other hand, in regard to non-pecuniary damage suffered by the next of kin of the disappeared victims, the Court recalls that international 401 Case of the “Street Children” (Villagrán-Morales et al.) v. Guatemala. Reparations and Costs. Judgment of May 26, 2001. Series C No. 77, para. 84; Case of Rosendo Cantú et al., supra note 45, para. 275, and Case of Ibsen Cárdenas and Ibsen Peña, supra note 24, para. 278.