51 in a judgment. Regarding reimbursement for costs and expenses, it is for the Court to prudently assess their scope, which includes the expenses arising before the authorities of the domestic jurisdiction and also those generated during the proceedings before the inter-American system, taking into account the circumstances of the specific case and the nature of the international jurisdiction of the protection of human rights. This assessment may be made based on the principle of equity and considering the expenses indicated by the parties, provided their quantum is reasonable.240 194. The Court has expressed that “the claims of the victims or their representatives with respect to costs and expenses, and the evidence that sustains them, must be presented to the Court at the first procedural moment, in other words, in the brief with pleadings and motions, unless such claims are made current at a subsequent time, in accordance with new costs and expenses that have been incurred in the proceedings before the Court.”241 The Court also reiterates that it is not sufficient to remit evidentiary documents, rather the parties must provide the rationale that relates the evidence to the fact under consideration and, in the case of alleged financial disbursements, the items and their justification must be described clearly.242 195. The Court takes note that vouchers were not submitted for the expenses involved in the national and international quest for justice for the violations suffered by members of the Community, other than an affidavit243 that was not sufficient to prove the amounts requested since no vouchers of any nature were submitted and that, moreover, the statement refers to expenses that would have been made both before the presentation of the brief with pleadings and motions as well as subsequently. Nevertheless, the Court considers that it may be presumed that the GAM incurred expenses in the domestic quest for justice and internationally before the inter-American system. Therefore, the Court sets the payment of a total of USD 30.000,00 (thirty thousand United States dollars) for the concept of costs and expenses. This amount is to be delivered to the GAM. In the monitoring compliance phase of this judgment, the Court will order the reimbursement by the State to the victims or their representatives of the reasonable expenses duly proved for this procedural step.244 G. Method of compliance of the payments ordered 196. The State shall make the payment of compensation for the pecuniary and nonpecuniary damages and the reimbursement of costs and expenses ordered in this judgment directly to the persons indicated therein, within one year of notification of this judgment, although the State may make full payment at an earlier date, in the terms of the following paragraphs. 197. If the persons who were alive at the time of the delivery of this judgment die before the State makes the corresponding payment, this shall be delivered directly to their heirs, in accordance with the applicable domestic law. Cf. Case of Garrido and Baigorria v. Argentina. Reparations and Costs. Judgment of August 27, 1998. Series C No. 39, para. 82 and Case of Herzog et al. v. Brazil, supra, para. 401. 241 Case of Garrido and Baigorria v. Argentina, supra, para. 82 and Case of Ramírez Escobar et al. v. Guatemala, supra, para. 424. 242 Cf. Case of Chaparro Álvarez and Lapo Íñiguez v. Ecuador. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 21, 2007. Series C No. 170, para. 277 and Case of Amrhein et al. v. Costa Rica, supra, para. 494. 243 Cf. Affidavit of March 8, 2018 of the Administrator of the GAM (evidence file, annex 5 to the final written arguments of the representative, fs. 5590 to 5595). 244 Cf. Case of the Xákmok Kásek Indigenous Community v. Paraguay. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of August 24, 2010. Series C No. 214, para. 331 and Case of Herzog et al. v. Brazil, supra, para. 404. 240