244. The State expressed that it was committed to pay the relevant costs and expenses from November 2020 to the conclusion of the international proceedings in the event that the Court declares its international responsibility. 245. The Court recalls that, in accordance with its case law, costs and expenses form part of the concept of reparation as long as the activity undertaken by the victim, with the purpose of obtaining justice at both the national and international levels, implies disbursements that should be honored when the State’s international responsibility is declared in a judgment. With respect to the reimbursement of costs and expenses, the Court shall prudently assess their scope, which includes the expenses 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 for the protection of human rights. This assessment may be based on the principle of equity and may take into account the expenses indicated by the parties, as long as the quantum is reasonable. 168 246. The Court has indicated that “the claims of the victims and their representatives for costs and expenses, and the supporting evidence, must be presented to the Court at the first procedural opportunity granted to them; in other words, in the pleadings and motions brief, without prejudice to those claims being updated with new costs and expenses arising from the proceedings before the Court.” 169 The Court also reiterates that the mere submission of evidentiary documents is not sufficient, but rather the parties must show the relationship of the evidence with the matter pleaded and that, in the case of alleged financial disbursements, the items and their justification must be clearly indicated. 170 247. As both the representatives and the State affirm that part of the costs and expenses disbursed have been paid and that there remain only the expenses incurred since November 2022 during the current proceedings and in view of the amounts requested by the representatives and the receipts of expenses presented, the Court fixes, in equity, the payment of USD 2,500.00 (two thousand five hundred United States dollars) for the concept of costs and expenses. This sum must be delivered directly to the representatives. At the monitoring stage of compliance with this judgment, the Court may order that the State reimburse the representatives the reasonable expenses that they might incur at that procedural stage. 171 G. Reimbursement of the expenses to the Victim’s Legal Assistance Fund 248. The President of the Court, by Resolution of May 24, 2022, granted the request of the representatives for access to the Legal Assistance Fund and ordered that financial aid be assigned to cover the expenses for the presentation of the two individuals who testified at the public hearing and the appearance of up to two legal representatives in the public hearing, as well as for the affidavits of two persons, as long as such expenses are reasonable. 249. The State was sent the report on the disbursements from the Fund, which reached the total of USD 4,372,75 (four thousand three hundred seventy-two United States dollars and seventy-five cents) and, pursuant to Article 5 of the Fund’s Operating Rules, it was granted a period to present the observations that it deemed pertinent. The State did not present any observations. The Court, pursuant to Article 5, must now evaluate whether it should order the State to reimburse the Legal Assistance Fund for the disbursements that have been incurred. 168 Cf. Case of Garrido and Baigorria v. Argentina. Reparations and Costs. Judgment of August 27, 1998. Series C No. 39, paras. 82 and 244 and Case of Manuela et al. v. El Salvador, supra, para. 317. Cf. Case of Garrido and Baigorria v. Argentina. Reparations and Costs, supra, para. 79 and Case of the Former Employees of the Judiciary v. Guatemala, supra, para. 160. 169 170 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. 277 and Case of Manuela et al. v. El Salvador, supra, para. 318. 171 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 Digna Ochoa et al. v. Mexico, supra, para. 193. 55