59 people in their traditional territory. Such fund will serve to finance educational, housing, agricultural, and health projects, as well as provide electricity and drinking water, if necessary, for the benefit of the Saramaka people. The State must allocate said amount for this development fund in accordance with paragraph 208 of the present Judgment. 202. An implementation committee composed of three members will be responsible for designating how the projects will be implemented. The implementation committee shall be composed of a representative appointed by the victims, a representative appointed by the State, and another representative jointly appointed by the victims and the State. The Committee shall consult with the Saramaka people before decisions are taken and implemented. Furthermore, the members of the fund’s implementation committee must be selected within six months from the notification of the present Judgment. Should the State and the representatives fail to reach an agreement as to the members of the implementation committee within six months after notice of the present Judgment, the Court may convene a meeting to resolve the matter. D) COSTS AND EXPENSES 203. As previously noted by the Court, costs and expenses constitute part of the concept of reparation under Article 63(1) of the American Convention.213 204. As such, the Court takes into account that the representatives incurred expenses during the course of the domestic and international proceedings in this case. Consequently, the representatives seek an award of all costs incurred in preparing and pursuing this case domestically as well as before the Commission and the Court. They are not, however, seeking reimbursement of attorney’s fees in this case, which they have waived. The Association of Saramaka Authorities seeks reimbursement of costs and expenses incurred during the period of 2000 through 2007 in the amount to US$ 108,770.27. In addition, the representatives requested that the Forest Peoples Programme be awarded an equitable sum of US$ 30,000.00 for their respective costs and expenses. 205. The State argued that there is no justification for an award of costs and expenses in the present case. It further contested the receipts provided by the Association of Saramaka Authorities and asserted that the inconsistencies found in said documentation preclude the Court from reaching an equitable decision in this respect. 206. With regard to the request for an equitable award of US$ 30.000,00 (thirty thousand United States dollars) on behalf of the Forest Peoples Programme for the costs they have incurred in the present case, this Court considers that an equitable and reasonable award of US$ 15.000,00 (fifteen thousand United States dollars) is consistent with amounts ordered by this Tribunal in other cases with similar circumstances, and therefore orders the State to pay said amount directly to the Forest Peoples Programme. 207. The Association of Saramaka Authorities, on the other hand, seeks reimbursement of costs and expenses in the amount to US$ 108,770.27 and submitted receipts that purportedly support said request. This Court has analyzed said receipts and has found several problems with them. For example, the amounts stated in many of the receipts do not correspond with that claimed by the Association. Additionally, many of the receipts were illegible, or missing. The relationship between some of the receipts and the present case is also questionable. Nevertheless, the Court is of the opinion that the Association has 213 Cf. Case of Garrido and Baigorria, supra note 207, para. 79, and Case of The “White Van” (Paniagua Morales et al.), supra note 49, para. 212. Cf. also Case of La Cantuta, supra note 179, para. 243, and Case of the Miguel Castro Castro Prison, supra note 8, para. 455.