90. Furthermore, the Court finds that, since the next of kin of the 89 deceased victims lack active representation (supra para. 4), the State must safeguard the rights to reparation of these beneficiaries in good faith. In this regard, the Court will assess the State’s compliance while exercising its authority to monitor this Judgment. C) Measures of integral reparation: rehabilitation and satisfaction guarantees of non-repetition, 91. Reparation of the damage caused by the violation of an international obligation requires, whenever possible, integral restitution (restitutio in integrum), which consists in restoring the situation that existed before the violation occurred. When this is not possible, as in most cases, the Court will establish measures to guarantee the violated rights or to repair the consequences of the violations. Therefore, the Court has considered the need to adopt different measures of reparation in order to redress the damage integrally; hence, in addition to the pecuniary compensation, the guarantees of non-repetition, and measures of rehabilitation and satisfaction are especially relevant for the damage caused.90 1. Guarantees of non-repetition 92. In cases such as this one, in which there has been a recurring pattern of disasters in the Honduran prison system (supra para. 24), guarantees of non-repetition are of greater relevance as a measure of reparation, so that similar incidents do not recur and to help prevent them.91 In this regard, the Court recalls that the State must prevent the recurrence of human rights violations such as those described in this case and, to that end, adopt all the legal, administrative and other measures required to ensure that the inmates can exercise their rights,92 in keeping with the obligations of respect and guarantee established in Articles 1(1) and 2 of the Convention. 93. This Court recalls that in the Judgment of February 1, 2006, in the case of López Álvarez v. Honduras,93 the Court had already ordered Honduras that, as a measure of reparation: The State must adopt measures designed to create conditions that ensure the inmates of Honduran prisons an adequate diet, medical attention, and physical and sanitary conditions consistent with the relevant international standards, and implement a training program on human rights for prison officials, in the terms of paragraphs 209 and 210 of [the said] Judgment. 94. However, under the proceeding of monitoring compliance, the Court observes that more than six years have passed since this measure was ordered and it has not yet been implemented.94 In addition, the Court underscores that serious situations continue to occur 90 Cf. Case of Cantoral Benavides v. Peru. Reparations and costs. Judgment of December 3, 2001. Series C No. 88, paras. 79 to 81, and Case of González Medina and family, supra note 13, para. 277. 91 Cf. “Guarantees of non-repetition […] will contribute to prevention.” Principle 23 of the Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law. UN Doc. A/Res/60/147. Resolution approved by the United Nations General Assembly on 16 December 2005, Principle 23. 92 Cf. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez. Merits, supra note 10, para. 166, and Case of the Dos Erres Massacre, supra note 78, para. 240. 93 Cf. Case of López Álvarez, supra note 65, ninth operative paragraph. 94 Cf. Case of López Álvarez v. Honduras. Monitoring compliance with judgment. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of February 6, 2008, considering paragraph 20. 26