100 provide information on the damages covered by the reparations established by the Comprehensive Reparations Plan (PIR), the items included in the Economic Reparations Program (PRE), the program’s compensation ceilings and the current status of the registration of victims in the instant case in the Single Registry of Victims (RUV). Therefore, the Court does not have sufficient information to reach a decision on the effectiveness of the reparations contemplated in the PIR in this case. 335. As for the civil reparations established by the National Criminal Chamber in the judgment of February 9, 2012, for the sum of S/. 25,000 new soles in favor of each of the legal heirs of the injured parties, according to the evidence presented by the State in the context of the execution of that judgment, the convicted defendant Oscar Alberto Carrera Gonzales made 11 deposits for the sum of S/. 50 new soles in judicial certificates of deposit as payment for civil reparations during the period from December 2013 to September of 2014. 376 In this regard, there is no evidence that any payment has been made in favor of the relatives of the disappeared victims. Finally, regarding the State's argument on the possibility that the representatives could have taken action at the domestic level, through the appropriate channels, in order to demand payment from the civilly liable third party, the Court considers that this argument is time-barred since was only presented in its final arguments. 336. In view of the foregoing, it is incumbent upon the Court to award non-pecuniary and pecuniary reparations based on its own jurisprudence. D.1. Non-pecuniary damage 337. International jurisprudence has repeatedly established that the judgment may constitute per se a form of reparation. 377 However, in its case law the Court has developed the concept of non-pecuniary damage and has established that this “may include both the suffering and afflictions caused to the direct victim and his family, the impairment of values of great significance for the individual, as well as changes of a non-pecuniary nature in the living conditions of the victim or his family.” 378 338. In consideration of the circumstances of this case, the violations committed, the suffering caused and experienced to different degrees, the time elapsed, the denial of justice, as well as the change in the living conditions of some of the next of kin, the harm caused to the personal integrity of the victims’ families and other consequences of a non-pecuniary nature, the Court establishes in equity the following compensation for non-pecuniary damage in favor of each of the victims: a) USD $80,000.00 (eighty thousand United States dollars) to each of the adults who were forcibly disappeared: Francisco Hilario Torres, Dionicia Quispe Mallqui, Antonia Hilario Quispe, Magdalena Hilario Quispe, Mercedes Carhuapoma de la Cruz, Ramón Hilario Morán, Dionicia Guillén Riveros and Elihoref Huamaní Vergara. b) USD $80,000.00 (eighty thousand United States dollars) to each of the children who were forcibly disappeared: Yessenia Osnayo Hilario, Miriam Osnayo Hilario, Edith Osnayo Hilario, Wilmer Hilario Carhuapoma, Alex Jorge Hilario, Raúl Hilario Guillén and Héctor Hilario Guillen. Cf. Brief of January 7, 2015, of the Second National Criminal Court (evidence file, folio 5524), and Brief of the Executive Secretary of the High Level Multisectoral Commission in charge of State actions and policies regarding peace, collective reparations and national reconciliation (evidence file, folios 4714 and 4715). 377 Cf. Case of El Amparo v. Venezuela. Reparations and costs. Judgment of September 14, 1996. Series C No. 28, para. 35, and Case of Osorio Rivera and Family Members v. Peru, supra, para. 286. 378 Cf. 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, and Case of Osorio Rivera and Family Members v. Peru, supra, para. 286. 376