the sum of US$15,000.00 (fifteen thousand United States dollars) for Carlos Mémoli and US$15,000.00 (fifteen thousand United States dollars) for Pablo Mémoli. D. Costs and expenses 222. As the Court has indicated on previous occasions, costs and expenses are included in the concept of reparation established in Article 63(1) of the American Convention, 346 because the activities carried out by the victims in order to obtain justice, at both the national and the international level, entail disbursements that must be compensated when the international responsibility of the State has been declared in a judgment convicting it. 223. The representatives asked that the Court order “payment of the costs and expenses that have been proved [or] that are easily inferred from the circumstances of this case.” 347 For its part, the State requested that, “in the hypothesis that they are not rejected in this case,” the costs and expenses “be established […] based on equity.” Regarding the trips made by the victims to Washington D.C. to present briefs relating to their petition, the State indicated that “the presumed victims made these trips on their own responsibility, not in the context of a working meeting or hearing convened by the Commission. The said briefs could have been presented […] without the need to appear in person.” 224. This Court has indicated that the claims of the victims or their representatives for costs and expenses, and the evidence to support them, must be presented to the Court at the first procedural moment granted to them; that is, in the pleadings and motions brief, without prejudice to these claims being updated subsequently, in keeping with the new costs and expenses incurred owing to the proceedings before this Court. 348 Moreover, the Court reiterates that it not sufficient merely to forward probative documents, but rather the parties must submit arguments that relate the evidence to the fact that it is considered to represent, and, in the case of alleged financial disbursements, the items and their justification must be clearly established. 349 225. In this case, this Court observes that the representatives forwarded some evidence on the expenses presumably incurred by Messrs. Mémoli during the processing of the litigation at 346 Cf. Case of Garrido and Baigorria v. Argentina. Reparations and costs, supra, para. 79, and Case of Suárez Peralta v. Ecuador, supra, para. 217. 347 In this regard, the representatives indicated that the “consequential damage” caused to Pablo Mémoli owing to “the expenditure incurred before the domestic and inter-American systems” amounted to US$44,362.00 (forty-four thousand three hundred and sixty-two United States dollars). They specified that, for the criminal proceeding, he had incurred expenses amounting to US$7,362.00 (seven thousand three hundred and sixty-two United States dollars), which included the cost of hiring a lawyer, “fuel, depreciation of vehicle, toll costs, and meals” arising from travel by Pablo Mémoli to the Provincial Court in La Plata and subsequently to Buenos Aires, the fees of the complainants’ lawyer, and the expenses of the proceeding before the “National Court,” and the State’s lawyer. In addition, they indicated that the expenses arising “from exercising the right to defense in the criminal proceeding, […] and in the civil proceeding,” including “photocopies, court fees, bonds, and travel to Mercedes, La Plata and Buenos Aires,” the amount calculated “over [twenty] years of continuous and interrupted proceedings,” was a further $25,000.00 (twenty-five thousand [United States]) dollars.” Regarding the expenses incurred in the proceedings before the interAmerican system, they indicated that they had incurred expenses of approximately US$12,000.00 (twelve thousand United States dollars), as a result of “five trips to Washington [by Pablo Mémoli] to provide documents and to hold direct conversations with those who were in charge of the case,” as well as expenditure on “telephone calls, photocopies, and mail for [ten] years” before the Inter-American Commission. The representatives did not specify the expenses possibly incurred by Carlos Mémoli. 348 Cf. Case of Chaparro Álvarez and Lapo Íñiguez, supra, para. 275, and Case of Gudiel Álvarez et al. (“Diario Militar”) v. Guatemala. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 20, 2012. Series C No. 253, para. 380. 349 Cf. Case of Chaparro Álvarez and Lapo Íñiguez, supra, para. 277, and Case of Gudiel Álvarez et al. (“Diario Militar”) v. Guatemala, supra, para. 380. 79