74. The State argued that “no amount is appropriate for costs and fees," since “it repeats the claims made under the category of consequential damages" and that there are documents demonstrating the expenses incurred throughout the process. Furthermore, it alleged that the representatives “conflate [...] the expenses incurred by Dr. Boleso and his counsel domestically with those incurred internationally." It also indicated that the case file contains no indication that Mr. Boleso "incurred procedural costs" during processing of the writ of amparo. 75. The Court reiterates that, according to its case law, costs and expenses are part of the concept of reparations because the activity undertaken by the victims in order to obtain justice at both the domestic and the international level entails expenses that must be compensated when the State’s international responsibility is declared in a judgment. Regarding the reimbursement of costs and expenses, it is for the Court to prudently assess their scope, which includes expenses incurred before the authorities of the domestic courts and those generated 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 may be made based on the principle of equity and taking into account the expenses indicated by the parties, provided their quantum is reasonable. 60 76. This Court has found that “the claims of the victims or their representatives with regard to costs and expenses, and the evidence to support them, must be submitted to the Court at the first procedural opportunity granted to them; that is, in the pleadings and motions brief, without prejudice to these claims being updated subsequently, in keeping with the new costs and expenses incurred during the proceedings before this Court.” In addition, the Court reiterates that it is not sufficient merely to forward probative documents; rather, the parties are required to include arguments that relate the evidence to the fact that it is supposed to represent and, in the case of alleged financial disbursements, to establish clearly the items and their justification. 61 77. In the instant case, the case file contains no evidence as to the costs and expenses incurred by the victim in the processing of this case domestically. In view of the lack of proof for these expenses, the Court rules to order, in equity, the payment of USD 2,000.00 (two thousand United States dollars) for costs and expenses incurred by Mr. Héctor Hugo Boleso during the processing of this case in the domestic jurisdiction. Additionally, during the processing of this case before the Inter-American Court, the victim had the assistance of the Inter-American Defender’s Office (supra para. 5), which provides free legal representation to alleged victims before this Court. 62 Therefore, it is not appropriate to order the payment of costs and expenses for the victims in this case. F. Reimbursement of expenses to the Victims’ Legal Assistance Fund of the Inter-American Court 78. In 2008, the General Assembly of the Organization of American States created the 60 Cf. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez v. Honduras. Reparations and Costs, supra, paras. 42, 46, and 47, and Case of Olivera Fuentes v. Peru, supra, para. 172. 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. 277, and Case of García Rodríguez et al. v. Mexico, supra, para. 330. 61 Cf. Agreement of Understanding between the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and the Inter-American Association of Public Defenders. Available at: https://www.corteidh.or.cr/convenios/aidef2009.pdf. 62 18