her father, her paternal family, her siblings and her culture, and prevented her from constructing a personality based on the truth.” 196. The State observed that the sum requested by the representatives was exorbitant, and bore no relationship to the amounts awarded by the Court in its case law. This was without beginning to consider the bases on which such a claim for reparation was founded, some of which were unrelated to the facts of the case and concerned Mr. Fornerón’s private sphere. 197. Based on its case law, and considering the circumstances of this case, the violations committed, the suffering caused, the time that has elapsed, the denial of justice, the alteration in the living conditions, and the other non-pecuniary consequences, the Court establishes, in equity, the sum of US$60,000 (sixty thousand dollars) for Mr. Fornerón and the sum of US$40,000.00 (forty thousand dollars) for M, for non-pecuniary damage. D. Costs and expenses 198. 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.126 199. In their pleadings and motions brief, the representatives had requested the sum of US$500,000.00 (five hundred thousand dollars) for costs and expenses, distributed as follows: a) For costs and expenses related to the domestic claim for justice, they requested US$150,000.00 (one hundred fifty thousand dollars), which included: (i) expenses for court fees, bonds, ius, continuous travel to Victoria, Gualeguay and Paraná, correspondence, telephone calls, computer services, facsimiles, etc.; (ii) preparation and drafting of different briefs before the local justice system, and follow-up on the proceedings to date, and (iii) legal representation involving a considerable number of hours spent on collecting information, and preparing, editing and reading material, and repeated interviews with Mr. Fornerón and his family over the past 10 years. b) For expenses incurred by CESPPEDH owing to the international petition, they requested the sum of US$350,000.00 (three hundred and fifty thousand dollars), which included: (i) the constant advocacy of the case before the Inter-American Commission, meetings with lawyers, victims, next of kin of the victims, and experts to discuss different aspects of the case, creation of disciplinary teams and their respective fees; (ii) preparation of diverse briefs, follow-up on the process at the international level; (iii) legal representation involving a considerable number of hours spent on collecting information, and preparing, editing and reading material, and the discussion of the different briefs filed during the international proceedings over the last six years, and (iv) office expenses, telephone calls, computer service, facsimiles and e-mails. 200. In their final written arguments, the representatives added the following amounts for costs and expenses: 126 Cf. Case of Garrido and Baigorria v. Argentina. Reparations and costs. Judgment of August 27, 1998. Series C No. 39, para. 79, and Case of González Medina and family v. Dominican Republic, supra note 10, para. 321. 52