100 discretion based on equitable grounds. And secondly, compensation may be made effective through public actions or works, such as the publication of an official message repudiating the human rights violations at stake and committing to prevent further similar violations with the aim of, among other purposes, recognizing the victims’ dignity.236 The first aspect of reparation of non-pecuniary damage will be analyzed in this section and the second aspect in the following section. 220. Pursuant to repeated international precedents, judgments constitute in and of themselves a form of reparation.237 However, in view of the circumstances of the instant case, the alterations to the living conditions of the victims and their pecuniary and non pecuniary consequences, the Court considers that non-pecuniary damage should be subject to reparation. 221. This Court finds that the non enforcement of the right to hold title to the communal property of the members of the Sawhoyamaxa Community, and the detrimental living conditions imposed upon them as a consequence of the State’s delay in enforcing their rights over the lands must be taken into account when assessing the value of the non-pecuniary damage sustained. 222. Similarly, the Court finds that the special meaning that these lands have for indigenous peoples, in general, and for the members of the Sawhoyamaxa Community, in particular (supra para. 133), implies that the denial of those rights over land involves a detriment to values that are highly significant to the members of those communities, who are at risk of losing or suffering irreparable damage to their lives and identities, and to the cultural heritage of future generations. 223. In the instant case, the State recognized “the need of the members of the Community to generate a productive yield out of the lands to be made over to them in order to cater for the needs of the Community and to allow the adequate development of such lands. To such effect, the State will implement a project for the adequate development of such lands, immediately after consultations with and acceptance by the Community” (supra para. 203). 224. Based on the above the Court considers meet, on equitable grounds, to order the State to establish a community development fund in the lands to be made over to the members of the Community, as set forth in paragraph 207 of the instant Judgment. The State shall allocate the amount of US$ 1,000,000.00 (one million United States Dollars) to such fund, which will be used to implement educational, housing, agricultural and health projects, as well as to provide drinking water and to build sanitation infrastructure, for the benefit of the members of the Community. These projects must be established by an implementation committee, as described below, and must be completed within two years as from delivery of the lands to the members of the Indigenous Community. 236 Cf. Case of Acevedo-Jaramillo et al., supra note 3, para. 308; Case of López-Álvarez, supra note 3, para. 199; Case of the Pueblo Bello Massacre, supra note 3, para. 254. 237 Cf. Case of Acevedo-Jaramillo et al., supra note 3, para. 309; Case of López-Álvarez, supra note 3, para. 200; Case of the Pueblo Bello Massacre, supra note 3, para. 258.