submissions and arguments, without prejudice to the fact that such claims may be updated at a later time, in accordance with the new costs and expenses incurred during the proceedings before this Court."147 In this regard, the Court considers that it is not sufficient to remit evidentiary documents; rather the parties must provide the reasoning that relates the evidence to the fact under consideration, and, in the case of alleged financial disbursements, the items and their justification must be described clearly.148 135. Regarding costs and expenses in favor of the victim, the Court notes that the representative did not provide evidence, and the corresponding argumentation does not allow for a complete justification of the amounts requested. However, it considers that the international processing of the case involved expenses for the victim and his representative, and therefore determines that the State should pay, in equity, to Mr. Nissen Pessolani the sum of USD$15,000.00 (fifteen thousand United States dollars). 136. It should be added that, during the monitoring of compliance with this Judgment, the Court may order the State to reimburse the victims or their representatives for reasonable and properly proven expenditures.149 G. Reimbursement of expenses to the Victims' Legal Assistance Fund 137. In 2008, the General Assembly of the Organization of American States created the Legal Assistance Fund of the Inter-American Human Rights System, with the "purpose [of] facilitating access to the inter-American human rights system for those individuals who currently do not have the necessary resources to bring their case to the system."150 138. In a note from the Secretariat of the Court of September 26, 2022, a report was sent to the State on the expenditure made in application of the Victims' Legal Assistance Fund for this case, which amounted to the sum of USD$5,269.12 (five thousand two hundred and sixty-nine United States Dollars and twelve cents) and, pursuant to Article 5 of the Court's Rules of Procedure on the operation of the Fund, a period of time was granted for Bolivia to submit any observations it deemed pertinent. 139. The State submitted its observations in writing dated October 7, 2022 in which it requested the Court "to make a prudent assessment of the need or not for such reimbursement to be paid by the State, taking into account the particularities of the case." 140. In light of Article 5 of the Rules of Procedure of the Fund, due to the violations declared in this judgment and that the requirements for eligibility for the Fund were met, the Court orders that the State reimburse the Fund for the amount of USD$5,269.12 (five thousand two hundred and sixty-nine United States Dollars and twelve cents) for Cf. Case of Garrido and Baigorria v. Argentina. Reparations and Costs, supra, para. 79, and Case of Mina Cuero v. Ecuador, supra, para. 167. 147 148 Cf. Case of Chaparro Álvarez and Lapo Íñiguez v. Ecuador. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations, and costs. Judgment of November 21, 2007. Series C No. 170, para. 277, and Case of Mina Cuero v. Ecuador, supra, para. 167. 149 Cf. Case of Ibsen Cárdenas and Ibsen Peña v. Bolivia. Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of September 1, 2010. Series C No. 217, para. 291, and Case of Cortez Espinoza v. Ecuador, supra, para. 187. AG/RES. 2426 (XXXVIII-O/08), Order adopted by the OAS General Assembly during the XXXVIII Regular Session of the OAS, at the fourth plenary session, held on June 3, 2008, "Creation of the Legal Assistance Fund of the Inter-American Human Rights System", Operative paragraph 2(a), and CP/RES. 963 (1728/09), Order adopted on November 11, 2009 by the Permanent Council of the OAS, "Regulations for the Functioning of the Legal Assistance Fund of the Inter-American Human Rights System," Article 1(1). 150 39