96 must be compensated when the international responsibility of the State has been declared in a Judgment. 306. The Court also reiterates that it is not sufficient merely to provide probative documentation; rather the parties are required to submit arguments that relate the evidence to the fact that it is considered to represent and that, with regard to alleged financial disbursements, the items and their justification are clearly established. 368 307. In the instant case, the evidence provided by the representative and the corresponding arguments do not justify fully the amounts requested. In addition, the Court notes that, in the motions and arguments brief, CEJIL requested the payment of the costs of the proceedings, but, in a communication of February 8, 2013, indicated that “as of that day, it [would] not continue providing legal representation to Rosa Elvira Franco Sandoval and her family”; nevertheless, it did not submit a request for costs and expenses for itself. Consequently, the Court will not rule in this regard. Taking this into account, the Court establishes, in equity, the sum of US$10,000.00 (ten thousand United States dollars), which must be delivered to REDNOVI, based on the expenses for the processing of the proceedings before the inter-American human rights system. This amount must be delivered to the representative. At the stage of monitoring compliance with this Judgment, the Court may establish the reimbursement by the State to the victims or their representatives of subsequent reasonable and duly authenticated expenses. 369 H. Reimbursement of expenses to the Victims’ Legal Assistance Fund 308. In 2008, the General Assembly of the Organization of American States established the Legal Assistance Fund of the inter-American human rights system, “in order 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.” 370 In the instant case, the orders of the President of January 8 and April 10, 2013 (supra paras. 9 and 11), authorized access to the Legal Assistance Fund to cover reasonable and necessary expenses, which, in this case, consisted in: (i) the necessary travel and accommodation expenses for Rosa Elvira Franco Sandoval and María Eugenia Solís to attend the public hearing, and (ii) the expenses of the preparation and delivery of the affidavits of the victims, Leonel Enrique Veliz Franco and José Roberto Franco. 309. Later, in a note of the Secretariat dated August 28, 2013, the State was given the procedural opportunity to present observations on the report of the disbursements made in application of the Victims’ Legal Assistance Fund. In its brief with observations, and previously in its answering brief, the State indicated that: (a) “it cannot accept that [the Court] convict it in this case […] because it does not consider itself responsible for any of the presumed violations; (b) because the main purpose of having recourse to the Court […] is not for the supposed victims to be able to enrich themselves at the expense of the State”; (c) and because the representative altered “the accounting documents related to the expense incurred for funeral services” and that “the principles of truth and good faith, and procedural economy have been infringed,” it was opposed to reimbursing any sum of money to the supposed victim and to her representative, and (d) it did not consider it fair to have to reimburse sums of money to the Victims’ Legal Assistance Fund because [according to the State,] as they were going to be covered by the Fund, there was an unnecessary and unjustified increase in the expenses.” 368 Cf. Case of Chaparro Álvarez and Lapo Iñiguez, supra, para. 277, and Case of J., supra, para. 421. 369 Cf. Case of Ibsen Cárdenas and Ibsen Peña v. Bolivia. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of September 1, 2010. Series C No. 217, para. 291 and Case of Liakat Ali Alibux, supra, para. 165. 370 AG/RES. 2426 (XXXVIII-O/08), Resolution adopted by the thirty-eighth General Assembly of the OAS, during the fourth plenary session, held on June 3, 2008, “Creation of the Legal Assistance Fund of the InterAmerican Human Rights System,” operative paragraph 2(b), operative paragraph 2(a), and CP/RES. 963 (1728/09), Resolution adopted by the OAS Permanent Council on November 11, 2009, “Rules of Procedure for the Legal Assistance Fund of the Inter-American Human Rights System,” article 1(1).