professional, business, family, social and political prestige and (c) the restoration of his electoral and political rights together with his eligibility by the State to hold public office. 193. The State indicated that these measures of reparation, such as the request to restore the electoral and political rights of the alleged victim, do not relate to the facts in this case. It also noted that the inter-American system cannot be used as an instance of review of national decisions delivered in accordance with national and conventional standards. 194. As to these requests, the Court notes that they lack a causal nexus with the violations declared in this judgment and, therefore, the Court considers that the delivery of this judgment and the reparations ordered in this chapter are sufficient and adequate to redress the violations suffered by the victim and does not find it necessary to order additional measures. C. Costs and expenses 195. The representative requested that the Court set and order that the State pay the costs of this process, which includes the professional activities in monitoring and defending Case Nº 12.984 before the Inter-American Commission and the activities before the Court. The State did not specifically refer to this measure of reparation. 196. The Court reiterates that, in accordance with its case law, costs and expenses form part of the concept of reparation as long as the activities deployed by the victims to obtain justice, at both the national and international planes, entail disbursements that must be compensated when the international responsibility of the State has been declared in a judgment. 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 of the protection of human rights. This assessment may be made based on the principle of equity and in consideration of the expenses indicated by the parties, provided their quantum is reasonable.199 197. The Court has held that “the claims of the victims or their representatives in relation to costs and expenses, and the evidence supporting them, must be presented to the Court at the first procedural opportunity granted them; namely, in the brief containing motions and pleadings, without prejudice to those claims being updated subsequently, to include new costs and expenses incurred as a result of the proceedings before [the] Court.” The Court also reiterates that “it is not sufficient to remit probative documents; rather the parties must develop the reasoning that relates the evidence to the fact under consideration and, in the case of alleged financial disbursements, the items and their justifications must be described clearly.”200 198. There is no precise probative evidence in the record of this case on the costs and expenses that Mr. Romero Feris or his representative incurred in the proceedings before the Court. The Court, however, considers that such proceedings necessarily imply monetary disbursements and, therefore, it determines that the State must deliver to the representative the sum of USD 10,000.00 (ten thousand United States dollars) for costs and expenses. This amount is to be paid directly to the representative. During the stage of monitoring compliance Cf. Case of Garrido and Baigorria v. Argentina. Reparations and Costs. Judgment of August 27, 1998. Series C No. 39, paras. 79 and 82 and Case of Ruiz Fuentes et al. v. Guatemala. Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of October 10, 2019. Series C No. 385, para. 251. 199 Cf. Case of Chaparro Álvarez and Lapo Íñiguez v. Ecuador, paras. 275 and 277 and Case of Ruiz Fuentes et al. v. Guatemala, para. 251. 200 37