suffering caused by his son’s disappearance and death. They therefore asked the Court to take into account the reasons why it was not possible to provide the said vouchers and to establish the sum of US$1,350.00 (one thousand three hundred and fifty United States dollars) for consequential damage and that this sum be delivered to Mr. Gómez Virula’s parents. 109. The State indicated that, “taking into consideration that the victim’s parents do not have the vouchers that substantiate the disbursements made, it left it to the criteria of the Court to establish, in equity, a sum that reimburses such expenses.” 110. The Court notes that it has no documentary evidence to substantiate the expenses incurred by Mr. Gómez Virula’s parents in relation to the investigation of the facts. However, it is natural that his family incurred expenditures owing to the numerous steps they took to expedite the case during the initial stages. Consequently, the Court finds it pertinent to establish, in equity, the sum of US$1,500.00 (one thousand five hundred United States dollars), for pecuniary damage to be delivered directly to Mr. Gómez Virula’s parents. E.2 Non-pecuniary damage 111. The representatives indicated that Mr. Gómez Virula’s parents “suffered a significant emotional impact and experienced pain, sadness, suffering, fear and anguish owing to the disappearance and subsequent death of their son. In addition, due the absence of a full and effective investigation, they experienced suffering, anguish, frustration and helplessness because of the impossibility of knowing the truth about what happened, which continues up until today because, in the instant case, there has still not been a complete an effective investigation into the events and the Guatemalan courts have not identified, prosecuted or convicted the masterminds and perpetrators of the disappearance and death of Mr. Gómez Virula.” Therefore, they asked the Court to establish, in equity, financial compensation for mental and moral harm.151 112. Based on the circumstances of this case and the violations declared, the Court finds it pertinent to establish, in equity, the sum of US$30,000.00 (thirty thousand United States dollars) for each of the victim’s parents, Antonio Gómez Areano and Paula Virula Dionicio. F. Costs and expenses 113. The representatives indicated that the Centro para la Acción Legal en Derechos Humanos had represented the alleged victim’s family “from the lodging of the petition in July 1995, to date, and its legal advisers had monitored the case and dedicated time to meetings with the members of the alleged victim’s family, prepared briefs with the information requested by the Commission and by the Court, as well as finding and presenting documentary evidence; all this has entailed expenses for the organization, particular for the payment of honoraria, which to date it has covered with its own funds.” Consequently, it requested US$11,000.00 (eleven thousand United States dollars) for the said concepts, considering that this sum was “reasonable and fair.” 114. The Court reiterates that, according to its case law, 152 costs and expenses form part of the concept of reparation because the actions taken by the victims to obtain justice at both the national and the international level entail disbursements that should be compensated when the international responsibility of the State has been declared in a judgment against it. On April 3, 2018, the representatives indicated that, in their pleadings and motions brief, “due to an error, they had failed to specify the sum claimed [for mental and moral harm]” and asked the Court to establish, in equity, the payment of US$30,000 to each of the alleged victim’s parents. However, this correction was time-barred. 151 Cf. Case of Garrido and Baigorria v. Argentina. Reparations and costs. Judgment of August 27, 1998. Series C No. 39, para. 82, and Case of Ruiz Fuentes et al. v. Guatemala. Preliminary objection, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of October 10, 2019. Series C No. 384, para. 251. 152 28