47 ordering the publication of a section thereof in the Official Gazette and in another newspaper of widespread circulation, are in and of themselves sufficient to publicly disseminate the international responsibility of the State in the case at hand.113 D) Costs and Expenses 143. The Commission requested the Court to order the State “the payment of the costs and expenses duly proven by [the representative], in consideration of the special characteristic of the case”. 144. The representative asked the Court to order the reimbursement of the costs and expenses which the alleged victims had incurred in the processing of the case before the domestic courts and Inter-American system, which includes: (1) “expenditure for transportation, communications and stationery, in addition to time and effort”, (2) the legal services of the Carlos Blancas Bustamante law firm, the payment of legal fees equivalent to 10% of the sum restituted to the members of the Association; of this, 300,000 (three hundred thousand) new soles have been paid to date”; and (3) “the advisory services and legal support activities” of CEDAL (Labor Advisory Center of Perú). In this regard, the representative provided an itemization of the expenses incurred by CEDAL as the result of the proceeding before the Inter-American system, which amount to US$ 16.956, 60 (sixteen thousand, nine hundred and fifty-six, with 60/00 cents of United States dollars). 145. The State pointed out, in addition, that “the amounts paid by the petitioners on occasion of the proceeding instituted at the domestic level have not been proven”. As to the international proceeding, the State alleged that CEDAL, by being a non-for-profit organization, financed by the international cooperation, “did not represent any expense for the alleged victims”. Furthermore, it questioned “in its entirety, the items [,] and, consequently, the amounts” mentioned in the documentary evidence tendered by the representative, given that it did not present a report proving how such evidence is “link[ed] to the conduct of the proceeding in this particular case”. Hence, the State alleged that the evidence tendered is not “closely and directly relate[d] to the steps taken in the instant case”. Finally, the State alleged that, “in Perú, the proceedings involving a constitutional action or constitutional rights are free”. 146. As the Court has indicated on previous occasions, costs and expenses are included in the concept of reparations embodied in Article 63(1) of the American Convention, since the actions taken by the victims, their next of kin, or their representatives to obtain justice at both the national and the international level involve expenditure that must be compensated when a State’s international responsibility has been declared in a judgment convicting it. Regarding reimbursement of costs and expenses, it is for the Court to assess their scope prudently. This reimbursement includes the costs arising before the domestic authorities, as well as those arising during the proceedings before the InterAmerican 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 must be made on an equitable basis and taking into account the 113 250. Cf. Case of Apitz Barbera et al. (“First Court of Administrative Disputes”) supra note 64, para.