Court to set fair fees and salaries, always based on the work actually performed on behalf of the victims in the case. It stated that the request for reimbursement of expenses with fees is based on percentages that are mere estimates, and which have resulted in excessive amounts. Therefore, it requested that the Court, in the absence of precise documentary evidence, establish the amount to be reimbursed based on equity and in accordance with the parameters that are usually applied. Finally, the State argued that the Court should not consider the expenses related to the “translation into Portuguese of a document submitted to the Court”, since the translation into Portuguese is not necessary and is a choice by the representatives that cannot be attributed to the State. 216. The Court reiterates that, based on its case law, costs and expenses form part of the concept of reparation, because the efforts made by the victims to obtain justice, both at the national and international levels, entail disbursements that must be compensated when the State’s international responsibility has been declared in a condemnatory judgment. Regarding the reimbursement of costs and expenses, it is for the Court to prudently assess their scope, which includes expenses incurred before the domestic courts and 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 for the protection of human rights. This assessment may be based on the principle of equity, taking into account the expenses indicated by the parties, provided that their quantum is reasonable.302 217. This Court has indicated that “the claims of the victims or their representatives for costs and expenses, and the evidence that supports these, must be presented to the Court at the first procedural opportunity granted to them, that is in the pleadings and motions brief, without prejudice to those claims being updated subsequently, in keeping with the new costs and expenses incurred as a result of the proceedings before this Court.”303 In addition, the Court 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, the items and their justification must be clearly established.304 218. Taking into account the amounts requested by each of the organizations and the proof of expenses presented, the Court orders the payment in equity of: USD $20,000.00 (twenty thousand United States dollars) for costs and expenses in favor of CEJIL, and USD $15,000.00 (fifteen thousand United States dollars) for costs and expenses in favor of GAJOP. These amounts shall be paid directly to those organizations. 219. At the stage of monitoring compliance with this judgment, the Court may order the State to reimburse the victims or their representatives for reasonable expenses incurred in that procedural stage.305 H. 220. Reimbursement of expenses to the Victims’ Legal Assistance Fund In the instant case, through a note of April 29, 2020, the Presidency of the Court Cf. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez v. Honduras. Reparations and costs. Judgment of July 21, 1989. Series C No. 7, paras. 42, 46 and 47 and Case of Garzón Guzmán et al. v. Ecuador, supra, para. 138. 303 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 Garzón Guzmán et al. v. Ecuador, supra, para. 139. 304 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 Garzón Guzmán et al. v. Ecuador, supra, para. 139. 305 Cf. Case of Ibsen Cárdenas and Ibsen Peña v. Bolivia. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of September 1, 2010. Series C No. 217, para. 29, and Case of Ríos Avalos et al. v. Paraguay, supra, para. 244. 302 -58-