E. Costs and Expenses 165. The representative pointed out that the Ecumenical Commission for Human Rights (CEDHU) has incurred expenses in handling the case on behalf of the victim before the InterAmerican Commission, including costs for document delivery, fax transmissions, phone calls, among others, as well as for litigation before the Court. In this regard, he requested that the State be ordered to pay $15,000.00 (fifteen thousand United States dollars). 166. The Court recalls that according to its case law, costs, and expenses are part of the concept of reparation, as the efforts made by the victims to obtain justice, both at the national and international levels, involve expenditures that must be compensated when the State's international responsibility is declared through a condemnatory judgment. Regarding the reimbursement of costs and expenses, it is within the discretion of the Court to assess their scope, which includes expenses incurred before domestic authorities as well as those 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 can be made based on the principle of equity and taking into account the expenses indicated by the parties, as long as the amount is reasonable.126 167. This Court has stated that "the claims of the victims or their representatives regarding costs and expenses, and the evidence supporting them, must be presented to the Court at the earliest procedural opportunity granted to them, that is, in the written submissions and arguments, without prejudice to the fact that such claims may be updated at a later time, in accordance with the new costs and expenses incurred during the proceedings before this Court."127 Furthermore, the Court reiterates that the mere submission of evidentiary documents is not sufficient; it is necessary for the parties to provide an argumentation that relates the evidence to the alleged fact being represented. In the case of alleged economic disbursements, it is essential to clearly establish the items and the justification for these expenses.128 168. In the present case, there is no evidentiary support in the record regarding the costs and expenses incurred by the Ecumenical Commission on Human Rights, on behalf of Mr. Mina Cuero, in the processing of the case before the Inter-American System. However, the Court considers it reasonable to assume that such procedures necessarily involved pecuniary expenditures, so it determines that the State must pay the Ecumenical Commission on Human Rights the amount of $15,000.00 (fifteen thousand United States dollars) for costs and expenses. It should be added that, during the compliance monitoring stage of this Judgment, the Court may order the State to reimburse the victim or their representative for reasonable expenses incurred during this procedural stage.129 I. Method of complying with the payments ordered 169. The State shall make the payment of the amounts established for compensation for 126 Cf. Case of Garrido and Baigorria v. Argentina. Reparations and Costs. Judgment of August 27, 1998. Series C No. 39, paras. 82, and Case of Pavez Pavez v. Chile, supra, para. 200. 127 Cf. Case of Garrido and Baigorria v. Argentina. Reparations and Costs, supra, para. 79, and Case of Pavez Pavez v. Chile, supra, para. 201. 128 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 Deras García et al. v. Honduras, supra, para. 131. 129 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 Deras García et al. v. Honduras, supra, para. 135.