111 (thirty-three thousand, seven hundred and thirty-three dollars of the United States of American and ninety-three cents) for expenses incurred after the presentation of the brief of pleadings and motions. 315. The State requested the Court to consider “as costs, only those expenses carried out in a reasonable and indispensable manner for the participation of the alleged victims and their representatives in the procedures before the InterAmerican System.” Moreover, the State contested the following costs carried out by the representatives in relation to: a) the “purchase of books and other supporting materials” not related with this case, and b) costs related to office supplies, food in national territory, and trips within Brazil not related to the case. Lastly, the State noted a difference in the value requested by the representatives as an expense for the psychological expert report and the receipt effectively presented to justify said expense. 316. Regarding reimbursement of costs and expenses, the Court must prudently assess their scope, which includes the expenses incurred before the authorities of the domestic jurisdiction, as well as those incurred during the proceedings before the Inter-American system, taking into account the circumstances of the specific case and the nature of the international jurisdiction for the protection of human rights. This assessment can be made based on the principle of equity and taking into account the expenses indicated by the parties, provided that the quantum is reasonable. 405 317. The Court has indicated that “the claims of the victims or their representatives concerning costs and expenses, and the evidence to support them, must be submitted to the Court at the first procedural occasion granted to them, namely, in the brief of pleadings and motions, notwithstanding the possibility that these claims may be updated subsequently, in keeping with the new costs and expenses that may have been incurred as a result of the proceedings before this Court.” 406 Furthermore, the Court reiterates that it is not sufficient that the parties merely submit probative documents; rather they are required to submit arguments that connect the evidence to the fact that it is supposed to represent, and in the case of alleged financial disbursements, the items and their justification must be clearly explained. 407 Lastly, the Court notes that of the receipts submitted to the Court, regarding some expenditures the relation made to the present case is not clear. 318. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Court has found that the representatives incurred various costs before this Court in relation with fees, the gathering of evidence, transport, and communication services, among others, in the domestic and international processing of the present case. Taking into account the aforementioned, the Court determines, in equity, that the State must provide a sum of US$ 5,000.00 (five thousand dollars of the United States of America), US$ 5,000.00 (five thousand dollars of the United States of America), 405 Cf. Case of Garrido and Baigorria, supra note 405, para. 82; Case of Rosendo Cantú et al., supra note 45, para. 284, and Case of Ibsen Cárdenas and Ibsen Peña, supra note 24, para. 288. 406 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. 275; Case of Fernández Ortega et al., supra note 53, para. 298, and Case of Rosendo Cantú et al., supra note 45, para. 285. 407 Cf. Case of Chaparro Álvarez and Lapo Iñiguez, supra note 406, para. 277; Case of Fernández Ortega et al., supra note 53, para. 298, and Case of Rosendo Cantú et al., supra note 45, para. 285.