security in a democratic society, or when the interest of the private lives of the parties so requires, or to the extent strictly necessary in the opinion of the court in special circumstances where publicity would prejudice the interests of justice; but any judgement rendered in a criminal case or in a suit at law shall be made public except where the interest of juvenile persons otherwise requires or the proceedings concern matrimonial disputes or the guardianship of children. 2. Everyone charged with a criminal offence shall have the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law. 3. In the determination of any criminal charge against him, everyone shall be entitled to the following minimum guarantees, in full equality: (a) To be informed promptly and in detail in a language which he understands of the nature and cause of the charge against him; (b) To have adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his defence and to communicate with counsel of his own choosing; (c) To be tried without undue delay; (d) To be tried in his presence, and to defend himself in person or through legal assistance of his own choosing; to be informed, if he does not have legal assistance, of this right; and to have legal assistance assigned to him, in any case where the interests of justice so require, and without payment by him in any such case if he does not have sufficient means to pay for it; (e) To examine, or have examined, the witnesses against him and to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on his behalf under the same conditions as witnesses against him; (f) To have the free assistance of an interpreter if he cannot understand or speak the language used in court; (g) Not to be compelled to testify against himself or to confess guilt. 4. In the case of juvenile persons, the procedure shall be such as will take account of their age and the desirability of promoting their rehabilitation. 5. Everyone convicted of a crime shall have the right to his conviction and sentence being reviewed by a higher tribunal according to law. 6. When a person has by a final decision been convicted of a criminal offence and when subsequently his conviction has been reversed or he has been pardoned on the ground that a new or newly discovered fact shows conclusively that there has been a miscarriage of justice, the person who has suffered punishment as a result of such conviction shall be compensated according to law, unless it is proved that the non-disclosure of the unknown fact in time is wholly or partly attributable to him. 7. No one shall be liable to be tried or punished again for an offence for which he has already been finally convicted or acquitted in accordance with the law and penal procedure of each country. of the ICCPR and Article 27 × Every State should provide an effective framework of remedies to redress human rights grievances or violations. The administration of justice, including law enforcement and prosecutorial agencies and, especially, an independent judiciary and legal profession in full conformity with applicable standards contained in international human rights instruments, are essential to the full and non-discriminatory realization of human rights and indispensable to the processes of democracy and sustainable development. In this context, institutions concerned with the administration of justice should be properly funded, and an increased level of both technical and financial assistance should be provided by the international community. It is incumbent upon the United Nations to make use of special programmes of advisory services on a priority basis for the achievement of a strong and independent administration of justice. of theVienna Declaration and programme of Action. In support of this contention, the Complainant cites Zimbabwean Human Rights NGO Forum v Zimbabwe.75 119. Arguing that the principle of the rule of law is a fundamental doctrine in national and international law, the Complainant argues that the acts and omissions of the Respondent States is a violation of the principle of the rule of law. The Complainant contends that the Respondent States have violated the principle per se because their acts and omissions towards the SADC Tribunal precludes supervision of the executive organ of SADC by its judicial arm; ousts access to the court; removes a remedy before an independent and impartial court; and withholds the law's protection of individuals against states. This, according to the Complainant is compounded by the fact that the events occurred after Zimbabwe's disregard for the orders of both its national courts and the SADC Tribunal. 120. Concluding his Arguments on the Merit, under the heading 'Conclusion and appropriate remedy', the Complainant presents an amended set of prayers, requesting the Commission to : 1. Declare that the decisions of the Respondent States violate the African Charter, the SADC Treaty and other provisions of International Law binding the Respondents ; 2. Direct the Respondents to lift the purported suspension of the SADC Tribunal and do all things necessary to restore its jurisdiction and operation ; 3. Direct the Respondent States to give effect to the rulings by the SADC Tribunal ; and 14