001359 of Article 14 of the lnternational Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which deals with the said rights in a greater detail.11 The relevant excerpts of Article '(...) ln the determination of any criminal charge against him, or of his rights and obligations in a suit at law, everyone shall be entifled to a fair and 14 reads: public hearing by a competent, independent and impartialtribunal established by law. (...)".12 lt flows from a joint reading of the provisions of the two instruments that an accused person has the right to a fair hearing. 79. The Court considers that, as it has consistently held, upholding the right to have one's cause heard requires that, in criminal matters, conviction and sentencing should be based on a case proven beyond reasonable doubt.13 The Court is of the opinion that such a standard applies with greater relevance, generally where a severe penalty is being imposed,la and particularly in instances involving the death sentence as is the case in the present Application. 80. The court further observes that, while it does not substitute national courts when it comes to assessing the particularities of evidence used in domestic proceedings, it retains the power to examine whether the manner in which such evidence was considered is compatible with international human rights norms.15 One critical concern in that respect is to ensure that the evaluation of facts and evidence by domestic courts was not manifesfly arbitrary or did not result in a miscarriage of justice to the detriment of the Applicant.16 11 see Armand Guehi v. Tanzania (Merits and Reparations), gg 73. see also witfred onyango Nganyi and Others v. Tanzania (Merits), SS 33-36; and Application No. 01212015, Judgment of 22 March 2018 (Merits), Anudo Ochieng Anudo v. United Republic of Tanzania, gg 1OO and 106. 12 The Respondent State became a party to the ICCpR on 11 Jut-1976. 13 Armand Guehi v. Tanzania (Merits and Reparations), SS 105-111. see also werema wangoko Werema and Another v. Tanzania (Merits), 5S 59-64; and Mohamed Abubakari v. Tanzania (Me;its), SS 174, 193 and 194. la See Application No. 053/2016. Judgment of 28/03/2019 (Merits), Oscar Josiah v. tJnited Republic of Tanzania, $ 51. See also Application No. 032i201 5. Judgment of 2110312018 (Merits), Kijiji lsiaga v. United Republic of Tanzania, gg 78 and 79. 15 See Mohamed Abubakari v. Tanzania (Merits), $g 26 and 173. See also Kijiji tsiaga v.Tanzania (Merits), $ 61; oscar Josiah v. Tanzania (Merits), gg s2-63; Armand Guehi v. Tanzaiia (Merits and Reparations), SS 105-1 11; werema wangoko werema and Another v. Tanzania (Merits), SS 59-64. 16 see Mohamed Abubakari v. Tanzania (Merits), SS 26 and 173; and Kennedy owino oiyachi ano Another v. Tanzania (Merits), g 38. 23 @-