before “administrative and judicial instances and/or before the Inter-American Commission […] and Court,” in the “actions undertaken” based on the dismissal of Mr. Fernández Gadea. This document records that the lawyer would receive 20% (twenty percent) of any amounts received and that, in November 2003, the victim had paid this professional the sum of US$40,000.00 (forty thousand United States dollars), an amount that “w[ould] not be counted within or deducted from the [agreement]” signed.212 241. In this regard, this Court notes that the claim for compensation for the expenses incurred in the processing of the criminal proceedings filed against the victims cannot be considered because although these proceedings originated in a complaint made by members of the Legislature by virtue of the cases included in the articles of impeachments that constituted the grounds for the impeachment proceedings, in this judgment no violation of any right derived from the said criminal proceedings has been declared. Consequently, there is no causal nexus to support the said request. 242. Regarding the different documents provided by the parties, their content allows the Court to verify the professional services that both victims had to contract to claim the protection of their rights at the domestic and international level. However, the Court has no way to verify the effective payment of the sums that, according to the said documents, were agreed on as fees for those services. Furthermore, no information was provided to determine the general parameters used to establish the fees; in other words, for both the different proceedings in the domestic jurisdiction, and those that corresponded to the inter-American system. Added to this, the series of documents concerning the measures undertaken does not allow the Court to verify the amount that was effectively disbursed. 243. Consequently, based on the different instance before which Messrs. Ríos Ávalos and Fernández Gadea had to appear and the actions that it was necessary to file to claim their rights, the Court establishes, in equity, a sum of US$20,000.00 (twenty thousand United States dollars) for costs and expenses that the State must pay to each of them. In the case of Mr. Fernández Gadea, the respective payment must be made as follows: (a) fifty percent (50%) to his wife, María Concepción Villalba Quevedo, and if she is deceased, the part that corresponds to her will increase that of the children of Mr. Fernández Gadea, as indicated in the following subparagraph, and (b) the other fifty percent (50) to be shared equally between his sons, Carlos Aníbal, José Luis, Julio Cesar and Jesús María, with the last names Fernández Villalba, and his daughter, Catalina Fernández Ocampos. If one or several of the children are deceased, the part that would have corresponded to them will increase that of the other children. 244. At the stage of monitoring compliance with this judgment, the Court may establish that the State must reimburse the victims or their representatives any reasonable expenses that they incur at that procedural stage.213 G. Reimbursement of expenses to the Victims’ Legal Assistance Fund 245. In an order of December 11, 2020, the President of the Court declared admissible the request presented by the representatives to access the Victims’ Legal Assistance Fund of the Court (hereinafter “the Fund”) in the instant case. In this order, the President established that Cf. Document dated November 5, 2019, recording the contingency fee arrangement between Carlos Aníbal Fernández Villalba, Julio César Fernández Villalba, Jesús María Fernández Villalba, and María Concepción Villalba widow of Fernández with the lawyer, Nicolás R. Gaona Irún (evidence file, volume IV, annex XV.E to the pleadings and motions brief, folios 8842 and 8843). 213 Cf. Case of Ibsen Cárdenas and Ibsen Peña v. Bolivia. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of September 1, 2010. Series C No. 217, para. 29, and Case of Grijalva Bueno v. Ecuador, supra, para. 195. 212 56