312. For its part, the State indicated that the representatives did not submit documents proving the expenses supposedly incurred for processing the case. 313. The Court has indicated that “the claims of the victims or their representatives for costs and expenses, and the evidence that supports them, must be presented to the Court on the first procedural occasion granted to them; that is, in the pleadings and motions brief, without prejudice to such claims being subsequently updated, in keeping with the new costs and expenses incurred owing to the proceedings before this Court.” 379 The Court reiterates that, pursuant to its case law,380 the costs and expenses form part of the concept of reparation, because the actions taken by victims to obtain justice, in both the domestic and the international sphere, entail disbursements that should be compensated when the international responsibility of the State has been declared in a judgment against it. In addition, the Court reiterates that it is not sufficient merely to forward probative documents; rather the parties must include arguments that relate the evidence to the fact it is meant to represent and, in the case of alleged financial disbursements, the items and their justification must be clearly established.381 314. Regarding the reimbursement of expenses, it is for the Court to prudently assess their scope, and this includes the expenses generated during the proceedings before the InterAmerican System, taking into account the circumstances of the specific case and the nature of the international jurisdiction for the protection of human rights. This assessment may be based on the principle of equity, taking into account the expenses mentioned by the parties, provided that their quantum is reasonable.382 315. In the instant case, the Court finds that, in relation to costs and expenses, although the representatives provided some evidence to accredit various expenses incurred during the litigation at international level, the fact is that these were attached to their brief of final arguments and were not related to different aspects and stages of their representation. Taking into account all the foregoing considerations, the Court sets in equity a proportional amount for the sum of US$10,000.00 (ten thousand United States dollars) for the expenses incurred in processing this case before the Inter-American Human Rights System. These monies shall be delivered to the representatives within one year of notification of this Judgment. In the stage of monitoring compliance with the Judgment, the Court may order the State to reimburse the next of kin or their representatives for subsequent expenses that are reasonable and duly proven.383 for accommodation, food and travel as Annexes 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14 of the representatives’ brief of final arguments. Also, Annex 15 of that brief included a certification from the Association of the Institute of Comparative Studies in Criminal Sciences of Guatemala, establishing that the total amount for professional services paid for processing the case within the Inter-American Human Rights System was Q. $99,000.00). Cf. Case of Chaparro Álvarez and Lapo Íñiguez v. Ecuador, supra, para. 275, and Case of the Kaliña and Lokono Peoples v. Suriname, supra, para. 320. 379 Cf. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez. Reparations and costs, supra, para. 42; Case of Garrido and Baigorria v. Argentina. Reparations and Costs, supra, para. 79, and Case of the Kaliña and Lokono Peoples v. Suriname, supra, para. 319. 380 Cf. Case Chaparro Álvarez and Lapo Íñiguez v. Ecuador, supra, para. 277, and Case of the Kaliña and Lokono Peoples v. Suriname, supra, para. 320. 381 Cf. Case of Garrido and Baigorria v. Argentina. Reparations and costs, supra, para. 82, and Case of the Kaliña and Lokono Peoples v. Suriname, supra, para. 319. 382 Cf. Case of Ibsen Cárdenas and Ibsen Peña v. Bolivia. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of September 1, 2010. Series C No. 217, para. 291 and Case of Quispialaya Vilcapoma v. Peru, supra, para. 323. 383 95