. .000302 of Appeal's judgment are extraordinary remedies in the Tanzanian judicial system, which an applicant is not required to exhaust prior to filing an application before this Court.s. 39.|n the instant case, the Court notes from the records that the Applicant went through the required trial and appellate processes up to the Court of Appeal, which is the highest Court in the Respondent State, before filing his Application before this Court. The Court thus finds that the Applicant has exhausted the local remedies available in the Respondent State's judicial system. ln line with this Court's abovementioned established position, the Applicant was also not required to pursue the constitutional petition in the High Court and the review procedure in the Court of Appeal of the Respondent State before seizing this Court, as both procedures are extraordinary remedies. 40.Accordingly, the Court dismisses the Respondent State's objection that the Applicant did not exhaust local remedies. B. Conditions of admissibility not in contention between the Parties 41.The Court notes that there is no contention regarding compliance with the conditions set out in Rule 40, Sub-rules1,2, 3,4, 6 and 7 of the Rules, on the identity of Applicant, the language used in the Application, compliance with the Constitutive Act of the African Union, the nature of the evidence adduced and the previous settlement of the case respectively, and that nothing on the record indicates that these requirements have not been complied with. 42.The Court therefore finds that all the admissibility conditions have been met and that this Application is admissible. 5 Alex Thomas v Tanzania (Merits), SS 63- 65 t7 Vlr.s-t- -/-