90 international level. CEJIL, in its capacity as representative of the victim, has also incurred in expenses arising from the international proceeding. For this reason, the representatives of the victim indicated that the expenses it incurred in the processing of the case at the domestic and international level are the following. 316. The representatives requested the Court to order the State to reimburse the costs and expenses incurred by the victim as legal assistance provided for his defense in the proceedings conducted at the domestic and international level. Moreover, they requested the reimbursement of the expenses incurred by CEJIL in its capacity of representative before international instances, mainly for the trips made by the lawyers of CEJIL to document and prepare the case and also the trips made during the processing of the case before the Commission. Moreover, they included the expenses for the corresponding legal work, investigation, gathering and presentation of evidence, interviews, and drafting of briefs. Of this amount, the representatives demonstrated expenses for the approximate amount of US$ 10,700.00 (ten thousand seven hundred dollars of the United States of America) related to the different expenses in which they incurred during the proceeding. Moreover, in the brief of final arguments, they updated the amounts originally indicated by forwarding vouchers of the expenses incurred in relation to the public hearing held at the seat of the Tribunal, such as trips, lodging, and meals of the representatives, expert witnesses, and victim, for the approximate amount of US$ 13,339.00 (thirteen thousand three hundred and thirty nine dollars of the United States of America). In sum, the representatives requested expenses for the approximate total amount of US$ 24.000.00 (twenty four thousand dollars of the United States of America). Regarding future expenses, the representatives requested the Court “to grant them, during the corresponding procedural stage, the opportunity to submit figures and up-to-date receipts regarding the expenses to be incurred during the proceeding of the case at the international contentious level.” 317. The State declared that "[t]here is no grounds for the claim according to which the Panamanian State must pay the totality of the costs and expenses incurred in the processing of the instant case before the Inter-American Commission and Court.” It specified that some of the detailed expenses do not correspond to this process and have already been canceled-out by the Panamanian government, and it referred in particular to “the receipts detailing the purchase of ticket for verification of the compliance with the Judgment in the case of Heliodoro Portugal.” 318. Regarding reimbursement of costs and expenses, it is for the Tribunal to assess their scope prudently. This reimbursement includes the costs arising before the domestic authorities, as well as those arising during the proceedings before the InterAmerican 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 must be made on an equitable basis and taking into account the expenses incurred by the parties, provided their quantum is reasonable.322 This Court has held that "the claims of the victims or their representatives, as to costs and expenses and the supporting evidence, must be offered to the Court at the first occasion granted to them, that is, in the brief of pleadings and motions, without prejudice to the fact that such claim may be updated in the future, according to new costs and expenses incurred during the processing of the case before this Court.”323 319. Taking into account the above mentioned considerations, the evidence furnished and the only specific objection of the State as of the receipts exhibited, in order to compensate for the costs and expenses incurred before the domestic 322 Cf. Case of Garrido and Baigorria, supra note 198, para. 82; Case of Ibsen Cárdenas and Ibsen Peña, supra note 28, para. 288, and Case of Rosendo Cantú et al., supra note 27, para. 284. 323 Case of Chaparro Álvarez and Lapo Íñiguez, supra note 99, para. 275; Case of Rosendo Cantú et al., supra note 27, para. 285, and Case of Fernández Ortega et al., supra note 27, para. 298.