right to sue, subsequently, before an abitration body or in the national forum, any pending amount for costs and expenses. In relation to the costs and expenses incurred during the litigation before the Commission, payment of the amounts indicated in Annex 48(a) of the pleadings and motions brief is requested, which must be paid directly to the victims. 201. The State argued that the representatives did not demonstrate that the law firms that intervened in the domestic sphere had provided services exclusively in sponsoring the case, and that additionally, the invoices demonstrating such matter were not presented. Additionally, it stated that the amount requested is excessive, for which it requests that an amount of between five thousand and ten thousand United States dollars be set. 202. The Court reiterates that, in accordance with its case law, 243 the costs and expenses are part of the concept of reparation, since the activity carried out by the victims in order to obtain justice, both at the national and international levels, implies expenses that must be compensated when the international responsibility of the State is declared through a conviction. Regarding the reimbursement of costs and expenses, it is up to the Court to prudently assess their scope, which includes the expenses generated before the authorities in the domestic jurisdiction, as well as those generated in the course of the process before the Inter-American 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 can be made based on the principle of equity and taking into account the expenses indicated by the parties, provided that their quantum is reasonable. 244 203. In addition, the Court has indicated that it is necessary that, when dealing with alleged economic disbursements, the representatives clearly establish the items and their justification. 245 In this case, the evidence provided by the representatives and the corresponding arguments do not allow a complete justification of the amounts requested. However, the Court considers that such procedures necessarily involved pecuniary expenditures, for which it determines reasonable to establish, in equity, the payment of a total amount of US$40,000.00 (forty thousand United States dollars) for costs and expenses. Said amount must be delivered and divided equally between the lawyers who participated in the domestic litigation and those who participated in the litigation before the Commission and the Inter-American Court. In the stage of monitoring compliance with this Judgment, the Court may order the State to reimburse the victim or his representatives for the reasonable expenses incurred in said procedural stage. 246 H. Method of compliance with payments ordered 204. The State must pay the compensation ordered for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and the reimbursement of costs and expenses established in this Judgment, directly to Mr. Emilio Palacio Urrutia, and for non-pecuniary damage to the persons indicated 243 Cf. Case of Garrido y Baigorria v. Argentina. Reparations and Costs. Judgment of August 27, 1998. Series C No. 39, par. 82, and Case of Manuela et al. v. El Salvador, supra, par. 317. 244 Cf. Case of Garrido y Baigorria v. Argentina, supra, par. 82, and Case of Manuela et al. v. El Salvador, supra, par. 317. 245 Cf. Case of Chaparro Álvarez and Lapo Íñiguez v. Ecuador, supra, par. 277 and Case of Manuela et al. v. El Salvador, supra, par. 318. 246 Cf. Case of Gudiel Álvarez et al. (Diario Militar) v. Guatemala. Interpretation on Judgment on Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of August 19, 2013. Series C No. 262, par. 62 and Case of Manuela et al. v. El Salvador, supra, par. 319. 62