A/HRC/45/16 responsibility;27 the placement of commemorative plaques;28 and the obligation to carry out comprehensive, impartial, effective and prompt criminal and/or administrative investigations in order to prosecute and punish those responsible for the arbitrary deprivation of liberty.29 D. Compensation 14. Compensation must be granted in an appropriate and proportional manner, taking into account the gravity of the violation and the circumstances of the case. This measure is aimed at addressing the physical and psychological damage experienced by the victim of arbitrary deprivation of liberty,30 by ensuring: (a) Compensation for the loss of income of the victim or of his or her family members, including pensions, social security benefits and other amounts of money as a result of the arbitrary deprivation of liberty; (b) Return of any asset seized by the State or that has been appropriated in any other way on the grounds of a conviction, sentence or court resolution; (c) Indemnification for lack of health care; (d) Accessible and reasonable rehabilitation in the place where the person is held; (e) Reimbursement of fines and legal expenses imposed on the victim as a result of the execution of the conviction or sentence that kept the victim arbitrarily detained; (f) Payment of the victim’s legal expenses and other expenses.31 15. Compensation should also be aimed at addressing any non-material harm or moral damage caused, which includes damage caused to the victim, such as loss of reputation, stigma, or broken family or community relations. 32 E. Guarantees of non-repetition 16. Guarantees of non-repetition are aimed at preventing the recurrence of a situation that gave rise to violations of human rights. In general, the States have an obligation to take measures to prevent similar violations from being committed in the future while guaranteeing prompt, adequate and effective remedies.33 In the context of arbitrary detention, this may include: 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 32 Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Yarce and otras v. Colombia (2016). Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Ruano Torres and others v. El Salvador (2015). Since 2018, the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention has included a standard paragraph in its opinions in which it urges the Government concerned to ensure a full and independent investigation into the circumstances surrounding the arbitrary deprivation of liberty of the victim, and to take appropriate measures against those responsible for the violation of the victim’s rights. See InterAmerican Court of Human Rights, Chaparro Álvarez and Lapo Íñiguez v. Ecuador (2007) and López Álvarez v. Honduras (2006). See also Human Rights Committee, Albert Womah Mukong v. Cameroon (CCPR/C/51/D/458/1991). Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law, para. 20. A/HRC/30/37, guideline 16, paras. 88–91. See also opinion No. 78/2018, para. 36. See Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Norín and others v. Chile (2014), Chaparro Álvarez and Lapo Íñiguez v. Ecuador, Cabrera García and Montiel Flores v. México, Maritza Urrutia v. Guatemala (2003), Yarce y otras v. Colombia (2016), López Álvarez v. Honduras (2006) and Ruano Torres and others v. El Salvador (2015). See also European Court of Human Rights, N. v. Romania (Application no. 59152/08), Baranowski v. Poland (Application no. 28358/95), Čalovskis v. Latvia (Application no. 22205/13), L.M. v. Slovenia (Application no. 32863/05), Garayev v. Azerbaijan (Application no. 53688/08), Ryabikin v. Russia (Application no. 8320/04), Labita v. Italy (Application no. 26772/95), Witold Litwa v. Poland (Application no. 26629/95), Varbanov v. Bulgaria (Application no. 31365/96), Hilda Hafsteinsdóttir v. Iceland (Application no. 40905/98) and James, Wells and Lee v. United Kingdom (Applications nos. 25119/09, 57715/09 and 57877/09). See Human Rights Committee, Albert Womah Mukong v. Cameroon (CCPR/C/51/D/458/1991), Alex Soteli Chambala v. Zambia (CCPR/C/78/D/856/1999), Achille Benoit Zogo Andela v. Cameroon