106 G. Costs and expenses 359. The representative indicated that: (i) regarding the costs and expenses of the domestic criminal case, I.V. does not have documentation to support her disbursements. However, she calculated that the global amount disbursed for the criminal case, including the three oral trials and the appeals (in addition to the expenses for transportation, photocopies, transcripts, telephone calls, etc.) amounted to US$6,000 over four years. If the Court did not agree with this request, she asked that it make a calculation based on criteria of equity, but taking into account as a “minimum parameter” the tariff of the La Paz Lawyers’ Professional Association, which equaled US$3,922. She asked that this sum be paid to I.V.; (ii) regarding the costs and expenses relating to the disbursements made by I.V. in the international procedure before the Commission, up until March 6, 2015, she asked for reimbursement of US$862, or that the Court calculate the amount corresponding to this item based on equity, and (iii) regarding the costs and expenses relating to the disbursements in the procedure before the Commission since March 6, 2015, and during the proceedings before the Court, she indicated that the cost for Derechos en Acción of representing I.V. before the interAmerican system amounted to US$6,143. 360. In her final written arguments, the representative presented a table updating the information on “expenses and costs” and established that the final amount for costs and expenses amounted to US$18,290 (or Bs. 127,298). Regarding the State’s request that the Court reject the amount of costs and expenses for Derechos en Acción as it was a non-profit organization, the representative indicated that “non-profit” did not mean that this association did not require financial recognition of its specialized work in the area of international legal matters and the reimbursement of duly authenticated disbursements, so that this argument should be rejected. She also asked that the payment in favor of Derechos en Acción be made directly to this association. 361. The State considered that “[b]ased on the information on the domestic proceedings submitted to the Court and the evident negligence of I.V. by failing to file the corresponding appeals against the ruling that decided the extinction of the criminal action, it was not appropriate for the Court to determine costs and expenses for an extinct criminal case.” Regarding the representation expenses of Derechos en Acción, the State argued that “[a]ccording to the power of attorney attached to the [motions and pleadings brief], Derechos en Acción is a non-profit organization; thus, the request for US$6,143 is totally contrary to the nature of this organization.” Consequently, it asked the Court to reject all aspects of the financial claim made by the representative. 362. The Court reiterates that, pursuant to its case law, costs and expenses form part of the concept of reparation, because the actions taken by the victims in order to obtain justice, at both the national and the international level, involve disbursements that should be compensated when the international responsibility of the State has been declared in a judgment convicting it. Regarding the reimbursement of expenses, it is for the Court to assess their scope prudently, and this includes those arising before the authorities of the domestic jurisdiction and also those generated 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 made based on the principle of equity and taking into account the expenses indicated by the parties, provided that their quantum is reasonable.414 As it has indicated on other occasions, the Court recalls that it is not sufficient merely to forward probative documents; rather the parties are required to include arguments that relate the evidence to the fact that it is considered to represent and, in the case of alleged financial disbursement, the items and their justification must Cf. Case of Garrido and Baigorria v. Argentina. Reparations and costs. Judgment of August 27, 1998. Series C No. 39, para. 82, and Case of Tenorio Roca et al. v. Peru, supra, para. 342. 414