98 e) in the event that there are no relatives in any of the categories defined in the preceding paragraphs, the compensation shall be paid to the heirs in accordance with domestic inheritance law. F. Costs and expenses 329. The Commission did not present specific arguments in this regard. The representatives requested the payment of USD 218,322.00 in favor of the Asociación Bufete Jurídico Popular for costs, expenses and professional fees incurred in the proceedings before the national and international courts since 2006, as well as the expenses incurred at the public hearing of the case and those eventually incurred at the stage of monitoring compliance with the judgment issued by the Court. They indicated that said amounts are supported by the actuarial report prepared by Roberto A. Molina Cruz. 330. In its answering brief, under the heading “VI. Costs and Expenses,” the State argued that the representatives “should have exhausted [,] in the first instance, the domestic procedures available in the domestic jurisdiction, before going to an international court.” Thus, it argued that “they are not entitled to seek reparation at the international level […] because they did not even attempt to exhaust such compensation in domestic proceedings.” 378 331. The Court reiterates that, in accordance with its case law, costs and expenses form part of the concept of reparation, since the activities carried out by the victims in order to obtain justice, both at the national and international levels, imply expenditures that must be compensated when the State’s international responsibility is declared by means of a condemnatory judgment. Regarding the reimbursement of expenses, it is up to the Court to prudently assess their scope, which includes the expenses generated before the authorities of the domestic jurisdiction, as well as those generated in the course of 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 based on the principle of equity and taking into account the expenses indicated by the parties, provided that their quantum is reasonable. 379 As the Court has stated on previous occasions, it is not sufficient to merely forward evidentiary documents; rather, the parties are required to include arguments that relate the evidence to the facts that they represent and, in the case of alleged financial disbursements, clearly specify the items and their justification. 380 332. The representatives submitted as annexes to their pleadings and motions brief, various documents related to alleged costs and expenses incurred from 2007 to 2014, including invoices from María Dolores Itzep Manuel for professional services rendered to the Asociación Bufete Jurídico Popular; invoices for professional services of Servicios Osorio and Sandra López; payments for fees to interns; receipts for payment of marriage, birth, death and baptism certificates of persons allegedly related to the case; proof of payment for registration of powers of attorney, copies of judicial proceedings and stamps; invoices for food and transportation services; rental of premises; payment of fuel; settlement of expenses incurred by the Asociación Bufete Jurídico Popular, etc. Likewise, the representatives submitted as evidence of their costs and expenses, an “Actuarial valuation of damages”, prepared by Roberto A. Molina Cruz in December 2014. 381 Regarding the representatives’ request for payment of costs and expenses, the State pointed out in its final written arguments that these had been presented “in a discretionary manner, since they were not reliably demonstrated with verifiable documents.” It also asked the Court to “take into consideration that the general description given by the representatives bears no relation to reality, and that when issuing a decision, it should also consider the country’s economic situation, and that the alleged victims should not be disproportionately enriched.” 379 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 Herrera Espinoza et al., paras. 248 and 249. 380 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. 275, and Case of Herrera Espinoza et al., para. 248. 381 Actuarial valuation of damages (evidence file, folios 5397 to 5437). 378