121. Regarding the pecuniary damage requested, in the section on the measure of restitution requested (supra para. 103), the Court has already indicated that it did not find it appropriate in to award the said compensation in this case. 122. Regarding the non-pecuniary damage requested, the Court notes that the victims’ civil conviction by the judgment of the Second Circuit Criminal Court of San José, confirmed subsequently by the Supreme Court of Justice, caused them some degree of suffering and anguish and had consequences on their personal and professional life. In this regard, during the public hearing in this case, Mr. Moya Chacón declared that the conviction entailed a “stain” that remained up until the present; that it was like “a wound that has not healed,” referring to the whole process for him and his family as “one of the most distressing times” of his life. 135 Meanwhile, Mr. Parrales Chaves indicated that both he and his family had suffered “psychological, emotional, financial [and] work-related” consequences because the sentence to pay 5 million colones “increased [his] anxiety as [he was] a journalist with limited resources at that time and, as now, he did not have the money to pay [the sum required]”; moreover, he even though that he “might be imprisoned due to this” or lose his home or his car, which also affected his health. 136 123. In view of the above, and considering the circumstances of this case, the violations committed, the suffering caused and experienced to different degrees, and the time that has passed, the Court will establish, in equity, compensation for non-pecuniary damage in favor of the victims. 124. Accordingly, the Court orders, in equity, the payment of US$20,000.00 (twenty thousand United States dollars) in favor of Ronald Moya Chacón and US$20,000.00 (twenty thousand United States dollars) in favor of Freddy Parrales Chaves, for the concept of non-pecuniary damage. F. Costs and expenses 125. For costs and expenses at the domestic level, the representatives requested US$1,920.00 (one thousand nine hundred and twenty United States dollars). For costs at the international level, they requested US$75,000.00 (seventy-five thousand United States dollars) plus the expenses incurred to date for international courier services of US$2,813.00 (two thousand eight hundred and thirteen United States dollars). In their brief with final written arguments, they asked that the Court include litigation expenses related to attending the public hearing in this case amounting to US$3,137.75 (three thousand one hundred and thirty-seven United States dollars and seventy-five cents), which resulted in a total for costs and expenses at the international level of US$80,950.75 (eighty thousand nine hundred and fifty United States dollars and seventy-five cents). 126. The State indicated that, from an analysis based on the equity principle, the amounts were “totally disproportionate” to the presumed harm suffered by the alleged victims. 135 Cf. Statement made by Ronald Moya Chacón at the public hearing held on February 14, 2022, during the Court’s 146th regular session. 136 Cf. Affidavit of Freddy Parrales Chaves dated January 27, 2022, p. 3 (evidence file, folio 1452). 35