327. For its part, the State did not submit observations on the representatives’ claims for costs and expenses. D.2 Considerations of the Court 328. As the Court has indicated, costs and expenses are part of the concept of reparations, whenever the actions carried out by the victims to obtain justice involve expenditure that must be compensated when the State’s international responsibility has been declared in a guilty verdict. Regarding their reimbursement, the Court must make a prudent estimate of their scope, which includes the expenses incurred in the proceedings before the authorities of the domestic jurisdiction and in the proceedings before this Court, taking into account the circumstances of the specific case and the nature of the international jurisdiction for the protection of human rights. The Court must make this assessment based on the principle of equity and taking into account the expenses indicated by the parties, provided the quantum is reasonable.376 329. In this regard, the Court reiterates that the claims of the victims or their representatives in relation to costs and expenses, and any supporting evidence, must be submitted at the first procedural opportunity granted to them, namely, in the pleadings and motions brief, even though such claims may be subsequently updated, in accordance with the new costs and expenses incurred in connection with these proceedings.377 In addition, it is not sufficient merely to submit probative documents; the parties must also present arguments that relate the evidence to the fact that it is supposed to prove and, in the case of alleged financial disbursements, the items and their justification must be clearly described. 378 330. Regarding the expenses requested by the lawyer Mario Melo, the Court notes that some of the vouchers do not identify the payments that they are intended to support. In fairness, the items referred to have been deducted from the calculations made by the Court. Also, as in other cases, it is evident that the representatives incurred expenses during the processing of the case before the inter-American human rights system. As to the expenses claimed by CEJIL, the Court observes that some of the vouchers submitted do not show clearly a connection with disbursements related to this case. However, it also notes that the representatives incurred various expenses related to, among other matters, the collection of evidence, transportation, and communications services during the domestic and international proceedings in this case. 331. In the instant case, the expenses incurred by the Sarayaku People have already been taken into account when determining the compensation for pecuniary damage (supra paras. 316 and 317). However, the Court determines, in equity and based on certain documentation provided that substantiate expenses, that the State must pay a total of US$58,000.00 (fifty-eight thousand United States dollars) for costs and expenses. Of this amount, the State must pay the sum of US$18,000.00 directly to CEJIL. The remainder must be paid to the Association of the Sarayaku People (Tayjasaruta), so that it may distribute it, as appropriate, among the other persons and, where applicable, organizations that have represented the Sarayaku People before the interAmerican system. During the stage of monitoring compliance with this Judgment, the Court may order the State to reimburse the victims or their representatives for subsequent reasonable and adequately proven expenses. 376 Cf. Case of Garrido and Baigorria v. Argentina, Reparations and costs, para. 82, and Case of González Medina and family members, para. 325. 377 Cf. Case of Chaparro Álvarez and Lapo Iñiquez v. Ecuador. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 21, 2007. Series C. No. 170, para. 275, and Case of González Medina and family members, para. 326. 378 Cf. Case of Chaparro Álvarez and Lapo Iñiquez v. Ecuador, Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs para. 277, and Case of González Medina and family members, para. 326. 89