58 Legal and administrative norms be adopted […] to strengthen the public defenders system […] and that these norms include sanctions for public defenders should they fail to comply with their obligations, particularly in those cases in which their negligence or dolus leaves a person defenseless, as happened to Mr. Lapo; […] that the Ecuadorean prison system be reformed so that those deprived of their liberty are not subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment during the time they spend in detention centers; that the members of the forces of law and order, especially the members of special forces such as CONSEP, receive periodic courses on human rights education, and that prison officials receive courses on human rights and basic principles for the treatment of prisoners, and on the series of principles for the protection of all those subjected to any form of detention. 272. The Court observes that the representatives requested these reparations in their final written arguments. In this regard, the Court considers that this was not the appropriate procedural opportunity for requesting such measures; the submission of the brief with requests and arguments has been established for this purpose. Nevertheless, the Court observes that the present case is the fourth Ecuadorean case submitted to this international court in which violations of due process of law and other rights protected by the American Convention have been declared within the framework of Ecuador’s antinarcotics policies.178 Consequently and owing to the circumstances of the instant case, the Court finds it pertinent to reiterate the education and training measures similar to those already ordered in Tibi v. Ecuador. 273. Consequently, the State must inform the Court, within six months of notification of this judgment, about the activities, timetables and expected results of the education and training measures for public officials that must be completed within 18 months of notification of this judgment. D) COSTS AND EXPENSES 274. As the Court has indicated previously, costs and expenses are included in the concept of reparation embodied in Article 63(1) of the American Convention.179 275. In the instant case, when forwarding their brief containing pleadings and motions (supra para. 5), the representatives did not submit the respective vouchers for the costs and expenses in which Messrs. Chaparro and Lapo had allegedly incurred, nor did they submit clear arguments in this regard. The Court considers that the claims of the victims or their representatives in relation to costs and expenses, and the evidence supporting them, must be presented to the Court at the first procedural opportunity granted them;180 namely, in the brief containing pleadings and motions, without prejudice to those claims being updated subsequently, to include new costs and expenses incurred as a result of the proceedings before this Court. 276. Given the lack of evidence mentioned in the preceding paragraph, the President decided to request the representatives that, as helpful evidence, they forward probative documentation on the costs and expenses incurred (supra para. 11). In this regard, the Court wishes to observe that it is a power and not an obligation of the Court to request the parties to provide helpful evidence. As stated in the preceding paragraph, the representatives have the obligation to submit the pertinent evidence opportunely. 178 Case of Suárez Rosero, supra note 72; Case of Tibi, supra note 43; Case of Acosta Calderón, supra note 47, and now the instant case. 179 Cf. Case of Garrido and Baigorria, supra note 152, para. 79; Case of the “White Van“ (Paniagua Morales et al.), supra note 23, para. 212, and Case of Zambrano Vélez et al., supra note 13, para. 159. 180 Cf. Case of Molina Theissen v. Guatemala. Reparations and costs. Judgment of July 3, 2004. Series C No. 108, para. 22, and Case of Acosta Calderón, supra note 47, para. 41.