satisfaction and guarantees of non-repetition.139 The Guidelines as well state that compensation should be provided for any economically assessable damage, such as physical or mental harm; lost opportunities, including employment, education and social benefits; material damages and loss of earnings, including loss of earning potential; moral damage; and costs required for legal or expert assistance, medicine and medical services, and psychological and social services.140 345. In addition to the above and more specifically in relation to this case, the Commission’s Luanda Guidelines provide that “[a]ll persons who are victims of illegal or arbitrary arrest and detention, or torture and ill-treatment during police custody or pre-trial detention have the right to seek and obtain effective remedies for the violation of their rights.”141 This position is also affirmed in the Commission’s jurisprudence.142 346. In its General Comment No. 4 on the Right to Redress for Victims of Torture in Africa, the Commission noted that the right to compensation for torture and other ill-treatment is multi-layered and compensation awarded to a victim shall be sufficient to compensate for any economically assessable damage resulting from violation, including, where applicable, reimbursement for medical expenses and provision of funds to cover future medical or rehabilitative services needed by the victim to ensure as full rehabilitation as possible; material and nonmaterial damage resulting from the physical and mental harm caused; loss of earnings and earning potential due to disabilities caused by the torture or other ill-treatment; and lost opportunities such as employment and education.143 347. The Commission observes that the Victim in the instant Communication suffered serious human rights violations for over 15 years, in the form of torture and other ill-treatment, arbitrary and unlawful detention, denial of the right to fair trial, unlawful interference with his right to practice religion, lack of medical care, and violation of his right to family life. It is impossible to ensure full restitution for the Victim due to the grave nature of the violations he suffered. 348. The Commission has previously held that in assessing the manner and mode of payment of compensation, it is important to consult victims and their legal representatives, and to be guided by international norms and practices relating to payment of compensatory damages.144 The Victim’s legal representatives in the present Communication (the Complainants) have indicated that the requested amount should not be less than 1 million Egyptian Pounds (approximately USD 140, 000) at the time of filing. 349. The Complainants also refer the Commission to comparable awards granted by regional, international and national mechanisms, to justify the amount they 139 Guidelines on the Right to Remedy and Reparation, para 18. As above, para 20. 141 Luanda Guidelines, (n 78 above), Guideline 38. 142 See n 45 above (Monim Elgak and others v. Sudan, para 100). 143 General Comment No. 4 on the Right to Redress for Victims of Torture in Africa (n 74 above), para 38. 144 Communication 290/04 - Open Society Justice Initiative (on behalf of Pius Njawe Noumeni) v. the Republic of Cameroon (2019), para 212 (V). 140 57