Court.” 347 In addition, the Court reiterates that it is not sufficient merely to submit probative documents, but rather the parties must also provide arguments that relate the evidence to the fact that it represents and, in the case of financial disbursements, that the items and their justification are clearly established. 348 327. In this case, the Court has verified that some of the vouchers forwarded by the representatives do not correspond to the processing of this case; others are illegible or unrelated to the case. Consequently, these expenses will not be taken into account when establishing the respective costs and expenses. In addition, as it has in other cases, the Court can infer that the representatives incurred expenses when processing the case before the inter-American human rights system. Furthermore, the Court notes the observations of the representatives concerning expenses incurred by Mr. González Medina’s family to attend the hearings before the Inter-American Commission; accordingly, the Court considers that it is also appropriate to order the payment of an amount for this concept directly to Luz Altagracia Ramírez. 328. Regarding the State’s request, that the Court determine a single amount for costs and expenses to be given to Luz Altagracia Ramírez, the Court finds no reason to deviate from its consistent practice of ordering the said payment in favor of the individuals or organizations for which it is expressly requested in the corresponding briefs. The State has offered no justification for this request, so the Court does not find it admissible. 329. Consequently, the Court determines, in equity, that, for costs and expenses, the State must deliver the sum of US$3,200.00 (three thousand two hundred United States dollars) to Luz Altagracia Ramírez de González; the sum of US$15,000.00 (fifteen thousand United States dollars) to the civil organization “Truth Commission,” and the sum of US$15,000.00 (fifteen thousand United States dollars) to the Center for Justice and International Law (CEJIL). At the stage of monitoring compliance with this judgment, the Court may order the State to reimburse the victims or their representatives subsequent reasonable and duly authenticated expenditure. F) Reimbursement of expenses to the Victims’ Legal Assistance Fund 330. In 2008, the General Assembly of the Organization of American States created the Legal Assistance Fund of the Inter-American Human Rights System, “to facilitate access to the inter-American human rights system by persons who currently lack the resources needed to bring their cases before the system.” 349 In the instant case, the victims were granted the financial assistance required to present the testimony of one alleged victim and one witness during the public hearing held in Costa Rica from the Court’s Legal Assistance Fund (supra paras. 7, 9 and 11). 331. In accordance with article 5 of the Rules of Procedure of the Legal Assistance Fund, on September 29, 2011, the State was given the opportunity to present its observations on 347 Case of Chaparro Álvarez and Lapo Íñiguez. v. Ecuador, supra note 219, para. 275, and Case of Fontevecchia and D’Amico v. Argentina, supra note 70, para. 127. 348 Cf. Case of Chaparro Álvarez and Lapo Íñiguez, supra note 219, para. 277, and Case of Contreras et al. v. El Salvador, supra note 51, para. 233. 349 AG/RES. 2426 (XXXVIII-O/08), Resolution adopted by the thirty-eighth OAS General Assembly during its fourth plenary session held on June 3, 2008, “Establishment of the Legal Assistance Fund of the Inter-American Human Rights System,” operative paragraph 2(a), and CP/RES. 963 (1728/09), Resolution adopted on November 11, 2009, by the OAS Permanent Council, “Rules of Procedure for the Operation of the Legal Assistance Fund of the Inter-American Human Rights System,” Article 1(1). 96