Article 27 of the Protocol. It also prays the Court to declare that the Applicant continue to serve his sentence. *** 87. The Court notes that the Applicant makes a prayer for material damage owing to loss of income without substantiating his claims. The prayer is consequently dismissed. 88. However, the Court found that the Respondent State violated the Applicant’s right to free legal assistance by failing to afford the Applicant counsel during the proceedings before domestic courts. 89. The Court notes that the violation found caused the Applicant moral prejudice and, therefore, in the exercise of its judicial discretion, it awards the Applicant the sum of Three Hundred Thousand (300,000) Tanzanian shillings as fair compensation.26 B. Non-pecuniary reparations 90. The Application prays that he be set free. 91. The Respondent State prays the Court to dismiss all of the Applicant’s requests and to order that the Applicant continue to serve his sentence. *** 92. In the instant case, the Court recalls that it has found that the Respondent State violated the Applicant’s right to a fair trial by failing to afford him free legal assistance. Without understating the gravity of this violation, the Court 26 Stephen John Rutakikirwa v. United Republic of Tanzania, ACtHPR, Application No. 013/2016, Judgment of 24 March 2022 (merits and reparations), § 85; Anaclet Paulo v. United Republic of Tanzania (merits) (21 September 2018) 2 AfCLR 446, § 107; Minani Evarist v. Tanzania (merits and reparations) (28 November 2018) 2 AfCLR 402, § 85. 21