52 The Court considers that the formulation and effective implementation of a preventive strategy to avoid the escalation of violence in the penitentiary centers is essential to ensure the life and personal safety of prisoners and also to guarantee that persons deprived of liberty are provided with the conditions needed to live with dignity. 183. In this context and as it has in other cases, 228 it is opportune for the Court to determine, as a guarantee of non-repetition, that the State must adopt, within a reasonable time, the necessary legislative, administrative, political and economic measures to ensure that prison conditions comply with international human rights norms; in particular, to alleviate the problems of overcrowding, shortcomings in the physical and sanitary infrastructure, deficient security systems and the lack of contingency plans. To this end, the State must, within two years, establish a plan and an action program, as well as a timetable of activities relating to compliance with this provision D) COSTS AND EXPENSES 184. As the Court has already indicated on previous occasions, costs and expenses are included within the concept of reparations embodied in Article 63(1) of the American Convention.229 185. The Court takes into consideration that Mr. Neptune’s representative incurred expenses during the domestic and the international proceedings in this case. In this regard, the Commission asked that the costs and expenses incurred at the domestic level in the judicial proceedings filed by the victim or his representative before national courts, and at the international level in the processing of the case before the Commission and the Court be taken into account ,230 including compliance with judgment.231 The representative asked the Court to take into account that Mr. Neptune had paid US$12,320.00 (twelve thousand three hundred and twenty United States dollars) to his lawyers in Haiti to defend him before the domestic courts,232 and indicated that they were not requesting compensation for the costs and expenses incurred to process the case before the Commission and the Court.233 186. In this case, the representative did not provide the Court with any evidence to support his claims for costs and expenses, in addition to appearing before the proceedings belatedly (supra para. 12). Despite this, and based on equity, the Court establishes that the State must pay the sum of US$5,000.00 (five thousand United States dollars) to Yvon 228 Cf. Hilaire, Constantine and Benjamin et al. v. Trinidad and Tobago. Merits, reparations and costs, supra note 34, para. 217; Boyce et al. v. Barbados, supra note 47, para. 117(d), and Montero Aranguren et al. (Detention Center of Catia) v. Venezuela, supra note 179, para. 145. 229 Cf. Garrido and Baigorria v. Argentina. Merits. Judgment of February 2, 1996. Series C No. 26, para. 79, and The “White Van” (Paniagua Morales et al.) v. Guatemala. Reparations and costs, supra note 39, para. 212. See also La Cantuta v. Perú, supra note 42, para. 243, and The Miguel Castro Castro Prison v. Colombia, supra note 39, para. 455. 230 Cf. Application presented by the Commission, supra note 3, para. 152 (folio 139). 231 Cf. Final written arguments presented by the Commission, supra note 22, para. 69 (folio 315). 232 Cf. Final written arguments presented by the representatives, supra note 65, paras. 90-91 (folio 289). 233 Cf. Final written arguments presented by the representatives, supra note 65, para. 90 (folio 289).