Arusha, Tanzania Website: www.african-court.org Telephone: +255-272-510-510 JUDGMENT SUMMARY The Applicants alleged that they were subjected to torture during their interrogation in order to coerce a confession. The Court held in its decision that the Applicants had not raised this claim before the High Court and further that there was nothing on the record with regards to the consideration of the confession by the national courts that required its intervention. The Court found that the Respondent State had not violated the Applicants’ freedom against torture provided for under Article 5 of the Charter. The Applicants further contended that the imposition of the death sentence by hanging is a violation of their right to inherent dignity. The Court held that the method of execution by hanging constitutes an encroachment upon human dignity and therefore a violation. With regard to the alleged violation of the Applicants’ right to be represented by an effective counsel, the Court held that the Applicants’ were provided free legal representation and found no evidence that the Respondent State hindered counsel’s access to the Applicants, restricted consultation, or denied them adequate time and facilities for the preparation of the defence. Therefore, the Court held that the Applicants’ right to be represented by effective counsel of their choice had not been violated. On the alleged violation of the right to be tried within a reasonable time, the Court held that the period of five years, three months, and 15 days before the commencement of trial was not unreasonable. It took into account the complexity of the case, including the number of witnesses and the analysis of DNA evidence, as well as the inherently time-consuming nature of pre-trial processes and the impact of institutional workload and scheduling. The Applicants alleged procedural irregularities amounting to a violation of their right to a fair trial. The Court held that it cannot assume the role of domestic courts by reexamining the details of evidence used to establish criminal culpability. Upon reviewing the record, it found that the national courts’ assessment of the evidence did 4