00{u2 91.The Court recalls that in its Judgment of 29 March 2019, it concluded that the statements made by certain political authorities, the media propaganda on the drug trafficking case and the resumption of the trial by CRIET tarnished the image of the Applicant, just as they damaged his reputation and the high personality as a politician and businessman he enjoys on the national and international scene. The Court also notes that the Applicant stated that since the beginning of the case against him, he lost the confidence of his business partners and that he is living in anguish seeing all his businesses destroyed and in fear of being imprisoned for twenty years. The Court notes that the Applicant has also been deeply terrified since the CRIET Judgment and the convictions against him, and suffered from being the victim of arbitrariness. 92.|n its Judgment of 29 March 2019, the Court ordered the Respondent State to quash the cRIET Judgment No. 007/3c.coR rendered on 18 october 2018, in a way that wipes out all its effects. That being the case, the Court considers such a measure as a source of moral satisfaction which, however, does not exclude the possibility of reparation in the form of pecuniary compensation. 93.|n this respect, the Court notes, for example, that in the case of Soci1td Benin Control SA v. Sfafe of Benin,le the OHADA Arbitral Tribunalzo considered that the unsubstantiated fraud charges brought against Benin Control SA caused the latter non-pecuniary prejudice in the eyes of its partners, and awarded the said company the tax-free lump sum of Two billion (2,000,000,000) CFA Francs in reparation for the non-pecuniary prejud ice suffered. 94. Having regard to these findings, the Court notes that the amount of the reparation to award the Applicant in the instant case, must be commensurate with the gravity of the charge levelled against him and the degree of humiliation and moral suffering he must have endured as a businessman and politician, president ls Arbitral Award 20 of 13151 2014 op. cil. Organization for the Harmonization of Business Law in Africa 25 S o(*"-e ( of the Employers'