pertinence, that in principle, the State should not hold onto its « domestic affairs » as the reason for its failure towards its international obligations. In any case, no constraints of intense magnitude that have lasted for a decade were brought to the attention of the Court, and which have impeded any decisive progress in the judicial investigations. In the Judgment of the « Heirs of Ibrahima Baré Mainassara » referred to above, the Court considered, in the same vein that « it translates into an obligation on State authorities to conduct inquiries and investigations into incidents and events in cause, and to guarantee, even if not a publication of findings thereon, at least free access to such findings (…) This is a minimal obligation, for which any default constitutes the violation of the right to justice » (§ 55). In these circumstances, the excuse of « political instability» must be deemed not to prosper. C) On reparation On the order sought as to pecuniary reparation, Counsel to Plaintiffs/Applicants requested the Court to award the sum of five (5) billions CFA francs in favour of Mrs. Gomes de Pina one billion CFA francs in favour of each of her children. The Court recalls that it has a wide range of powers to determine the quantum of reparation sought before it. In the instant case, it appears to the Court that the sums sought for reparation are highly excessive, since the objective of a procedure of this nature is partially symbolic. The Court is of the opinion that, owing to all the factors to be taken into consideration, it is reasonable to award, as reparation, the sum of ten (10) millions CFA francs to Mrs. Nazare Gomes de Pina ten (10) millions CFA francs equally to each of her three children, namely: -Eden Joao Gomes De Pina Vieira 15