41 d) US$, $50,000.00 (fifty thousand United States Dollars) for Mr. Ricardo Gutiérrez-Soler, Mr. Wilson Gutiérrez-Soler’s brother; and e) US$ 8,000.00 (eight thousand United States dollars) each for Mr. Wilson Gutiérrez-Soler’s next of kin: 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,. 86. Compensation shall be paid as established in paragraph 70 of this Judgment. D) LIFE PROJECT 87. The Commission argued that “the lack of redress and the fact that perpetrators are still unpunished destroyed [] Mr. Wilson Gutiérrez-Soler’s project”. On the other hand, the representatives asserted that the events in instant case changed his life “radically”, rupturing “his personality and” causing severance of “his family ties.” the life the the 88. The Court considers that the violations of Mr. Wilson Gutiérrez-Soler’s rights prevented him from achieving his personal and vocational development expectations, which under normal circumstances would have been feasible. Furthermore, they caused irreparable damage to his life, forcing him to sever family ties and go abroad, in solitude, in financial distress, physically and emotionally broken down. In Mr. Gutiérrez-Soler’s own words, the consequences of torture and of the subsequetent events were serious, to wit: my life was done with —and not just mine—, my son’s and my wife’s as well […] My family was lost, we lost the ties between parents and children […] Not only was I stripped of my self-worth, but of my family and my parents too. Likewise, it is proven that the specific sort of torture the victim underwent not only left him physical scars, but has also permanently lowered his self-esteem, and his ability to have and enjoy intimate relations of affection. 89. Considering all of the foregoing, the Court finds that damage to Mr. Wilson Gutiérrez-Soler’s “life project” has occurred as a result of the violation of his human rights. However, as in other cases,37 the Court decides not to compensate for said damage financially, since the Judgment awarding damages herein contributes to compensate Mr. Wilson Gutiérrez-Soler for pecuniary and non pecuniary damages (supra paras. 76, 78, 84(a) and 85(a)). The complex and all-encompassing nature of damage to the “life project” calls for action securing satisfaction and guarantees of non-repetition (infra paras. 103, 104, 105, 107 and 110) that go beyond the financial sphere.38 Notwithstanding the above , the Court considers that that no form of redress could return Mr. Wilson Gutiérrez-Soler the personal fulfillment options of which he was unfairly deprived or provide him with fresh options. 37 Cf. Case of Cantoral Benavides. Reparations (Article 63(1) American Convention on Human Rights). Judgment of 3 December 2001. Series C No. 88, para. 80; and Case of Loayza Tamayo. Reparations (Article 63(1) American Convention on Human Rights). Judgment of 27 November 1998. Series C No. 42, para. 153. 38 Cf. Case of Cantoral Benavides, supra note 37, paras. 63 and 80.