expenses indicated by the parties, provided their quantum is reasonable.105 85. This Court has found that “the claims of the victims or their representatives with regard to costs and expenses, and the evidence to support them, must be submitted to the Court at the first procedural opportunity 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 during the proceedings before this Court.”106 The Court also reiterates that “it is not sufficient merely to forward probative documents; rather, the parties are required to include arguments that relate the evidence to the fact that it is considered to represent and, in the case of alleged financial disbursements, ensure that the items and their justification are clearly described.”107 86. In this case, the Court observes that there is no precise evidentiary support in the case file with regard to the costs and expenses incurred by Mr. Gorigoitía or his representatives regarding the processing of the cases before the Commission and the Court. However, the Court finds that the procedures necessarily entailed financial expenses, for which it determines that the state must deliver to the representatives USD 15,000.00 (fifteen thousand United States dollars) for costs and expenses, an amount that must be divided among the representatives. This amount shall be delivered directly to the representatives. At the stage of monitoring compliance with this judgment, the Court may order the state to reimburse the victims or their representatives for any reasonable expenses incurred during that procedural stage.108 F. Reimbursement to the Victims’ Legal Assistance Fund 87. In this case, by means of a note from the Secretariat dated February 11, 2019, the Court ordered to declare admissible the request made by the alleged victim to avail himself of the Victims’ Legal Assistance Fund. Likewise, in the order calling a hearing of March 20, 2019, the President indicated that financial assistance would be allocated to cover the travel and accommodation expenses necessary for Oscar Gorigoitía to appear before the Court to give his statement at the public hearing held in this case. Likewise, in that order, the President determined that the reasonable expenses incurred to formalize and send the affidavits for two statements given by the representatives, as determined by them, could be covered with funding from the Victims' Legal Assistance Fund. 88. On June 10, 2019, an expenditure report was sent to the state in accordance with the provisions of Article 5 of the Court's Rules of Procedure on the operation of the aforementioned fund. Thus, the state had the opportunity to present its observations on the disbursements made in the instant case, which amount to USD 987.36 (nine hundred eighty-seven dollars and thirtysix cents of the United States of America). The state did not present observations on these disbursements. 89. Based on the violations declared in this judgment and that the requirements to access the Assistance Fund were met, the Court orders the state to reimburse the Fund in the amount of 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 Omeara Carrascal et al. v. Colombia. Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of November 21, 2018. Series C No. 368, para. 342. 106 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. 275, and Case of Women Victims of Sexual Torture in Atenco v. Mexico. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of November 28, 2018. Series C No. 371, para. 379. 107 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 Isaza Uribe et al. v. Colombia. Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of November 20, 2018, para. 211. 108 Cf. Case of Gudiel Álvarez et al. (Diario Militar) v. Guatemala. Interpretation of the Judgment on the Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of August 19, 2013. Series C No. 262, para. 62; and Case of Duque v. Colombia. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of February 26, 2016. Series C No. 310, para. 227. 105 25