110 jurisprudence has repeatedly established that the Judgment may constitute per se a form of reparation.402 Nevertheless, considering the circumstances of the case sub judice, the suffering that such committed violations caused to said next of kin, the prevailing impunity in the case, as well as the changes in their living conditions, and the other consequences of an intangible or non-pecuniary nature suffered by them, the Court deems it appropriate to establish a sum, in equity, as compensation for non-pecuniary damage to the family members indicated as victims in the present case.403 311. In regard to its jurisprudence, in consideration of the circumstances of the present case, the violations committed, the suffering caused, and the treatment received, the time elapsed, the denial of justice and information, as well as change in living conditions and the remaining consequences of a non-pecuniary nature suffered, the Court sets, in equity, a sum of US $ 45,000.00 (forty-five thousand dollars of the United States of America) for each direct relative, and US $ 15,000.00 (fifteen thousand dollars of the United States of America) to each non-direct relative, considered victims in the present case and indicated in paragraph 251 of the present Judgment. The compensation offered in the present Judgment, shall not pose an obstacle to the other reparations that, eventually, could be issued in the domestic law. 3. Costs and expenses 312. As the Court has indicated on previous occasions, costs and expenses are included within the concept of reparation embodied in Article 63(1) of the American Convention.404 313. The Commission requested the Court to order the State to pay costs and expenses incurred in the processing of the present case. 314. The representatives requested the Court to set, in equity, a sum to the benefit of the Commission of the Next of Kin of the Deceased and Disappeared and of the Grupo Tortura Nunca Máis of Río de Janeiro, for the expenses incurred in the elaboration of the applications and the documentation in the case, reserving the right to request future for expenses. Subsequently, they specified that they did not incur additional expenses subsequent the brief of pleadings and motions. Likewise, the Center for Justice and International Law incurred expenses for trips to San José and to Washington, communications, photocopies, stationary, mailings related to the follow-up of the present case, as well as trips to locate and meet with the next of kin of the victims, in addition to the corresponding expenses related to the care given to the case and the investigation, compilation, and presentation of evidence, the interviews carried out, and the preparation of the various procedural stages. In particular, the Center for Justice and International Law incurred US$ 45,196.53 (forty-five thousand, one hundred and ninety-six dollars of the United States of America and fifty-three cents) in expenses from 1999 until July of 2009, and US$ 33,733.93 402 Cf. Case of Neira Alegría et al.. Reparations and Costs, supra note 377, para. 56; Case of Rosendo Cantú et al., supra note 45, para. 278, and Case of Ibsen Cárdenas and Ibsen Peña, supra note 24, para. 282. 403 Cf. Case of Neira Alegría et al.. Reparations and Costs, supra note 377, para. 56, Case of Rosendo Cantú et al., supra note 45, para. 278, and Case of Ibsen Cárdenas and Ibsen Peña, supra note 24, para. 282. 404 Cf. Case of Garrido and Baigorria v Argentina. Reparations and Costs. Judgment of August 27, 1998. Series C No. 39, para. 79; Case of Rosendo Cantú et al., supra note 45, para. 280, and Case of Ibsen Cárdenas and Ibsen Peña, supra note 34, para. 284.