17 66. With regard to Article 25 in relation to Article 1(1) of the Convention, the Court has already established that the State is obliged to guarantee access to the administration of justice to all persons and, above all, to an effective, prompt and simple recourse that ensures the protection of their rights. Article 25 of the Convention is “one of the basic pillars, not only of the American Convention, but also of the rule of law in a democratic society according to the Convention”26 and is directly related to Article 8(1) of the Convention, which establishes that every person has the right to a hearing with due guarantees and within a reasonable time, by an, independent and impartial judge or tribunal for the determination of his rights, whatever their nature27. 67. In view of the foregoing, this Court considers that Peru has the obligation to ensure and make effect the recourses relating to judicial guarantees for the protection of fundamental rights and freedoms, which include the procedures of habeas corpus and amparo. XI COSTS AND EXPENSES 68. In his brief on reparations, the victim requested the Inter-American Court to approve the following amounts for reimbursement of costs and expenses: a) US$ 34,939.00 (thirty-four thousand nine hundred and thirty-nine United States dollars) for the fees of Javier Valle Riestra at the start of the proceeding under the military justice system; b) US$ 94,892.24 (ninety four thousand eight hundred and ninety-two United States dollars and twenty-four cents) and US$ 10,202.60 (ten thousand two hundred and two United States dollars and sixty cents) for fees that have already been paid to Alberto Borea Odría and Miguel Borea Odría, respectively, for assuming his defense in the trial under the military justice system in Peru and for the application before the Inter-American Commission and the Inter-American Court; c) US$ 210,000.00 (two hundred and ten thousand United States dollars) for pending fees for Alberto Borea Odría, for the proceedings at the merits and reparation stages before the Inter-American Court; d) US$ 45,000.00 (forty-five thousand United States dollars) for retaining a lawyer’s office in the United States to provide legal advice; e) US$ 46,512.18 (forty-six thousand five hundred and twelve United States dollars and eighteen cents) for air travel, owing to 12 journeys to the seat of the Court in San José, Costa Rica, and the seat of the Commission in Washington D.C. by his lawyers and family, and also travel by other lawyers to different places to further his case; and 26 Cf. Ivcher Bronstein case, supra note 1, para. 135; The Constitutional Court case, supra note 1, para. 90; and Bámaca Velásquez case, supra note 24, para. 191. 27 Cf. Loayza Tamayo case. Reparations, supra note 7, para. 169.