45 98. The Court has already referred to “sham double jeopardy” resulting from a first trial wherein there have been breaches of the due process of the law.44 In view of the proven facts and of Colombia’s acknowledgement of liability, it is to be inferred that the proceedings in the instant case before domestic courts were vitiated by such shortcomings. Therefore, the State would not be entitled to claim exemption of the obligation to investigate and punish on the grounds of the judgments in proceedings that failed to meet the standards of the American Convention, because judicial decisions originating in such internationally illegal events cannot be the first step to double jeopardy. 99. In this regard, the Court notices that in Colombia, it is possible to reopen proceedings which have resulted in acquittals or in decisions to terminate proceedings or to preclude investigation, such as those that kept the perpetrators in the instant case unpunished. In this direction, the Court thinks highly of Colombia’s willingness to to institute “the actions necessary for the competent entity to commence the review proceedings of the final decisions pronounced in […] the instant case,” and orders that Colombia shall proceed promptly to take the measures necessary to institute such proceedings, which it must expedite within reasonable time. 100. The aforementioned proceedings shall also be conducted in accordance with international standards for documentation and for the construction of forensic evidence proving the commission of torture acts, such as those set forth by Dr. María Cristina Nunes de Mendonça’s Expert Reports submitted to the Court (supra para. 42), and especially with those in the Manual on the Effective Investigation and Documentation of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (“the Istanbul Protocol”).45 b) Medical and psychological treatment 101. After reviewing the Argument by the representatives, those of the Commission aas well as the body of evidence in the instant case, it is inferred that the psychological suffering by Mr. Wilson Gutiérrez-Soler and his next of kin, derived from the violations, have lasted through to this day and impair their respective life projects. On account of the foregoing, this Court, as it has done before,46 is of the opinion that reparations must also include psychological and psychiatric treatment for all the victims who wish to undergo it. 102. For the purpose of contributing to the reparation of such damage, the Court orders that the State shall provide free of charge, at the health-care facilities the State may indicate, the psychological and psychiatric treatment the following parties may require: María Elena Soler de Gutiérrez, Ricardo Gutiérrez-Soler, Yaqueline Reyes, Luisa Fernanda Gutiérrez-Reyes, Paula Camila Gutiérrez-Reyes, Leonardo Gutiérrez-Rubiano, Leydi Caterin Gutiérrez-Peña, Sulma Tatiana Gutiérrez-Rubiano, Ricardo Alberto Gutiérrez-Rubiano and Carlos Andrés Gutiérrez-Rubiano. Such treatment shall include, among other things, the medication which may be needed. 44 Cf. Case of Carpio Nicolle et al., supra note 41, paras. 131 and 132. 45 Cf. U.N.O., United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Geneva, 2001, available at: www.unhchr.ch/pdf/8istprot.pdf. 46 Cf. Case of Huilca Tecse, supra note 43, para. 117; Case of the Serrano Cruz Sisters, supra note 7, paras. 197 and 198; and Case of Lori Berenson Mejía, supra note 7, para. 238.