G. Costs and expenses 189. The representatives asked the Court to order the State to pay the following amounts for costs and expenses incurred by the organizations that have defended the victims: (i) USD 15,698.14 (fifteen thousand six hundred ninety-eight dollars and fourteen cents) for travel, meetings, copy services, and fees, to the Center for Justice and International Law, and (ii) USD 5,044.80 (five thousand forty-four dollars and eighty cents) for travel, meetings, and fees, to the Pastoral Land Commission. They also asserted that the State should cover future expenses for the compliance stage of the judgment at both the national and international levels. In addition, they asked the Court for permission to submit at a later date the figures and updated documentation for expenses incurred during proceedings before the Court, and that the judgment stipulate an amount for expenses during the compliance monitoring stage of the judgment. 190. After presenting the pleadings and motions brief, the representatives reported on expenses incurred by the organizations that had defended the victims, the Center for Justice and International Law and the Pastoral Land Commission, between April of 2021 and April of 2022. They stated that the Center for Justice and International Law had incurred expenses totaling USD 12,595.42 (twelve thousand five hundred ninety-five dollars and forty-two cents) for: the presentation of the pleadings and motions brief as well as subsequent briefs, such as observations on the preliminary objections presented by the State; preparation for the hearings held in this case; the collection of statements; and the presentation of expert opinions, their translations, and fees for them. With regard to this last point, they stressed that the “defense work” included a strategy of consistent communication that conveyed information on the case to civil society, restoring the memory of Gabriel Sales Pimenta and his important work of defense in the struggle for land, and publicizing the public hearing held for this case. With respect to the Pastoral Land Commission, they stated that it had incurred total expenses of USD 2,616.65 (two thousand six hundred sixteen dollars and sixty-five cents) for travel, meetings, and fees for two attorneys hired in January and April of 2022. 191. In sum, the representatives requested a payment of USD 28,293.56 (twenty-eight thousand two hundred ninety-three dollars and fifty-six cents) to the Center for Justice and International Law and USD 7,661.45 (seven thousand six hundred sixty-one dollars and forty-five cents) to the Pastoral Land Commission. 192. The State asked that the Court only take into account the amounts requested, the supporting documentation, and a direct relationship between the requests and the circumstances of the case. It also asked the Court to “objectively verify the work done jointly or by the representatives and for which reimbursement of costs is requested—development of the brief with pleadings, motions, and evidence as well as the final written arguments—to prevent the duplication of reimbursements resulting in disproportionate payments for Brazil.” Brazil also argued that with respect to expenses for fees and travel, there is no exclusive or necessary connection between the work of the Center for Justice and International Law and the case, as that organization had unilaterally established approximate percentages of activity to allocate to the case, and the travel expenses enumerated and whose reimbursement is requested do not appear to be related exclusively to the work of the Center for Justice and International Law on this case. Lastly, it asserted that the expenses related to “communication” should not be covered by the State, as they are not essential for processing the case. 193. The Court recalls that, pursuant to its case law, costs and expenses are part of the concept of reparation in all cases in which the efforts of the victims in seeking justice, both nationally and internationally, entail expenditures that must be compensated for when the international responsibility of the State is declared in a condemnatory judgment. With respect to reimbursement for costs and expenses, it is the Court’s responsibility to prudently assess their scope, which includes expenses incurred before domestic legal authorities, as well as those incurred in the course of the trial before the inter-American system, keeping in mind the circumstances of the specific case and 49