104 caused harm entails the obligation to make adequate reparation, and that this provision reflects a customary norm that is one of the basic principles of contemporary international law on State responsibility. 480 301. The Court has established that the reparations should have a causal nexus with the facts of the case, the violations declared, the damage proved, and the measures requested to redress the corresponding harm. 481 302. Bearing in mind the violations of the Convention declared in the preceding chapters, the Court will proceed to analyze the claims presented by the Commission and the representatives, in light of the criteria established in its case law concerning the nature and scope of the obligation to make reparation, in order to established the measures designed to redress the harm caused to the victims. 482 A) Injured party 303. The Court considers that, under Article 63(1) of the Convention, the injured party is anyone who has been declared a victim of the violation of any right recognized therein. Therefore, the Court considers Gladys Carol Espinoza Gonzáles, Teodora Gonzáles de Espinoza (deceased) and Manuel Espinoza Gonzáles to be the “injured party.” B) Obligation to investigate the facts that gave rise to the violations and to identify, prosecute and punish, as appropriate, those responsible 304. The Commission asked that the Court order the State to “[c]onduct an immediate, serious, and impartial investigation into the torture and rape of Gladys Carol Espinoza […] with a gender perspective,” and also to “[i]dentify all those responsible for such acts, […] and to impose on them the corresponding civil, administrative, and criminal penalties as a guarantee of non-repetition,” including the medical personnel, members of the Peruvian National Police and officials of the Public Prosecution Service and the Judiciary who committed irregularities in relation to the complaints of torture filed on behalf of Gladys Espinoza. 305. The representatives indicated that the State had failed totally to comply with its obligation to investigate the facts until 2012, almost 20 years after they were perpetrated. Consequently, they asked the Court to order Peru “to conduct, within a reasonable time, a complete, impartial and effective investigation in order to identify, prosecute and punish under the ordinary justice system all the perpetrators of the human rights violations” with penalties proportionate to the severity of the acts committed against Gladys Espinoza. According to the representatives, these investigations should include the rape and the acts of torture that Gladys Espinoza was a victim of during her detention in the DINCOTE, in the hospital to which she was transferred, and during the violent inspection in the Yanamayo Prison. They also asked the Court to order the State to investigate, prosecute and punish, with the corresponding civil and administrative and criminal measures, the medical, judicial, expert and police officials responsible for the irregularities and omissions committed in the judicial proceedings. 480 Cf. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez v. Honduras. Reparations and costs. Judgment of July 21, 1989. Series C No. 7, para. 25, and Case of the Human Rights Defender et al. v. Guatemala. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of August 28, 2014. Series C No. 283, para. 243. 481 Cf. Case of Ticona Estrada et al. v. Bolivia. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 27, 2008. Series C No. 191, para. 110, and Case of the Human Rights Defender et al. v. Guatemala, supra, para. 245. 482 Cf. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez. Reparations and costs, supra, paras. 25 to 27, and Case of the Human Rights Defender et al. v. Guatemala, supra, para. 244.