99 That the Centro para la Justicia y el Derecho Internacional (hereinafter “CEJIL”), representing the victims or their next of kin, incurred certain expenses in the process of resorting to the inter-American human rights system.36 VI BENEFICIARIES 30. The court will now determine the person or persons who in the instant case are the “injured party”, pursuant to Article 63(1) of the American Convention. In view of the fact that the violations of the American Convention determined by the Court in its November 25, 2000 Judgment were committed against Efraín Bámaca Velásquez, Jennifer Harbury, José León Bámaca Hernández, Egidia Gebia Bámaca Velásquez, and Josefina Bámaca Velásquez, all of them –as victims- must be included in that category and be entitled to the reparations decided by the Court, both in connection with pecuniary damages, when appropriate, and in connection with non-pecuniary damages. With respect to the deceased victim, it will also be necessary to determine which of the reparations that may be decided in his favor can be transmitted through inheritance to his next of kin, and to which of them. 31. In the case of Mrs. Jennifer Harbury, the State has objected to her being entitled to possible reparations, both in her own right and through inheritance, as a consequence of her own statement that this reparation will be delivered, in full, to the relatives of Bámaca Velásquez, and it is therefore the opinion of the State that this is “an explicit waiver of the right declared in her favor by the Court, one that is full evidence because it was made during the contentious phase of the case before the Court”. The Court does not share the interpretation of the State regarding that statement, as it does not issue from the terms of that statement that such was Mrs. Harbury’s intention, and for these reason the Court believes that a determination of the compensation due to her is in order, and she can freely dispose of it. 32. As regards which compensations in favor of the victim can be inherited, the Court has pointed out that: [i]t is a common rule in most legislation that a person’s successors are his or her children. It is also generally accepted that the spouse participates in the assets acquired during the marriage, and some legislation also grants the spouse a succession right together with the children. If there are no children nor any spouse, common private law recognizes the ascendants as heirs. These rules, generally accepted in the community of nations, must be applied, in the opinion of the Court, in the instant litigation to determine the successors of the victims as regards compensation.37 36 See Power of Attorney granted by José León Bámaca to CEJIL in San Jose, Costa Rica, on June 19, 1998, Appendix 1 of the brief on Reparations filed by the representatives of the victims (supra para. 5); power of attorney granted by Jennifer Harbury to CEJIL in Texas, United States, on March 27, 2001, Appendix 2 of the brief on Reparations filed by the representatives of the victims (supra para. 5); power of attorney granted by Josefina and Egidia Gebia Bámaca Velásquez to José León Bámaca Hernández in San Marcos, Guatemala, on June 11, 1998, Appendix 3 of the brief on Reparations filed by the representatives of the victims (supra para. 5); power of attorney granted by José León Bámaca Hernández and Josefina and Egidia Gebia Bámaca Velásquez to CEJIL in San Marcos, Guatemala, on June 22, 1998, Appendix 3 of the brief on Reparations filed by the representatives of the victims (supra para. 5). 37 See Villagrán Morales et al. Case, Reparations, supra note 5, para. 67; Paniagua Morales et al. Case, Reparations, supra note 5, para. 84; and Neira Alegría et al. Case. Reparations (Art. 63(1) American Convention on Human Rights). September 19, 1996 Judgment. C Series No. 29, para. 60.