46 105. The Commission indicated that: a) the Court should order that the victims be reimbursed the reasonable costs and legal fees that were incurred in order to obtain justice, before both the national courts and the inter-American system; and b) it does not ask the Court to order the payment of costs and expenses to cover its own participation. With regard to the victims’ representatives, neither they nor their lawyers should be obliged to cover the costs related to the legal representation needed to seek justice, when this has been denied by the respective State and when the amount of the costs is reasonable. Consequently, the Commission considers that the payment of the costs and fees requested by the victims’ representatives is justified. The State’s arguments 106. The State declared that it agreed that the Court should decide on the fees and expenses incurred by the victims’ representatives, but only if the said expenses can be fully verified by legal documents that support these disbursements. It therefore requests the Court to reject any piece of evidence that does not meet this condition. The considerations of the Court 107. Costs and expenses should be understood within the concept of reparation established in Article 63(1) of the American Convention, because the actions taken by the victim or victims, their successors or their representatives to have access to international justice implies disbursements and commitments of a financial nature which should be compensated when delivering the judgment of condemnation. For this reason, the Court considers that the costs referred to in Article 55(1) of the Rules of Procedure also include the various necessary and reasonable expenses that the victim or victims incurred in order to have access to the inter-American system for the protection of human rights, and these expenses include the fees of those who provide legal assistance. Consequently, the Court must assess prudently the scope of the costs and expenses, bearing in mind the particular circumstances of the case, the nature of the international jurisdiction for the protection of human rights and the characteristics of the respective proceeding, which are unique and differ from those of other national or international proceedings92. 108. This Court has already indicated that the concept of costs includes both those corresponding to the stage of access to justice at the national level and those that refer to justice at the international level before the two instances: the Commission and the Court93. 109. To this end, the Court considers that, in reimbursement of the expenses and costs generated in the domestic jurisdiction and in the inter-American jurisdiction, it is fair to recognize to the representatives of the victims’ next of kin the sum of US$ 27,651.91 (twenty seven thousand six hundred and fifty-one United States dollars 92 cf. Loayza Tamayo case, Reparations, supra note 12, paras. 176 and 177; and Garrido and Baigorria case. Reparations, supra note 19, paras. 79, 80 and 82. 93 cf. Loayza Tamayo case. Reparations, supra note 12, para. 178; and Garrido and Baigorria case. Reparations, supra note 19, para. 81.