court, this court cannot take up this role from the domestic courts and investigate the details and particularities of evidence used in domestic proceedings.12 47. In the instant case, the record before this Court shows that the national courts convicted the Applicant on the basis of evidence tendered by two (2) prosecution witnesses. The Court of Appeal in determining the evidence tendered by PW2 (the deceased’s son) relied on its jurisprudence especially the case of Waziri Amani v. Republic which enumerates the guidelines on the identification of witnesses. Among the considerations a judge must consider in assessing identification evidence are: a. the distance at which the witness observed the incident; b. the time at which the crime was witnessed; c. the conditions in which such observations occurred including the lighting at the scene; and d. Whether the witness knew or had seen the accused before. 48. The Court notes, that the Court of Appeal assessed the circumstances in which the crime was committed and considered the arguments by both the Respondent State and the Applicant, who was duly represented by counsel, in order to eliminate possible errors as to the identity of the perpetrator of the murder. Furthermore, the Court of Appeal particularly noted that the Applicant was at the crime scene and thus his alibi was fabricated, that he was well known to the victim and PW2, that a torch was used in the commission of the crime, that it was possible for PW2 to identify the Applicant and further that PW2 himself was injured by the Applicant’s accomplice and therefore they were in close proximity. On the basis of the evidence adduced by the witnesses, the national courts convicted the Applicant and sentenced him to death. 12 Kijiji Isiaga v. Tanzania (merits) (21 March 2018) 2 AfCLR 218, § 65. 12