000 228 procedure before the domestic courts. However, he prays the Court to take into account his appeals before the High Court and the Court of Appeal, find that he has exhausted the local remedies and declare his Application admissible. *** 40.The Court notes that, after the District Court Judgment, the Applicant lodged an appeal before the High Court and, subsequently, before the Court of Appeal challenging both the issues of evidence and application of the sentence by the Judges, thus giving the afore-said courts the possibility to adjudicate the different allegations of violation relevant to his trial. 41.The Court notes also that the violations alleged by the Applicant form part of "a bundle of rights and guarantees" which relate to his appeal in the "domestic procedures" that resulted in his being found guilty and sentenced to thirty (30) years prison term. These issues in the instant case are part of "a bundle of the rights and guarantees" relating to the right to a fair trial which were the basis of the Applicant's appeal before the High Court and the Court of Appeal.e 42. Given the above findings, the Court holds that the domestic courts had ample opportunity to address the Applicant's allegations even without him having raised them explicitly. The Court notes that it has already in several cases brought before it decided that when alleged violations of the right to a fair trial form part of the Applicant's pleadings before domestic courts, the Applicant is not required to have raised them separately to show proof of exhaustion of local remedies.a 43. Regarding the constitutional petition, the Court has already determined that this remedy in the Tanzanian judicial system is an extra-ordinary remedy which Applicants are not required to exhaust before seizing this Court.s 3 Application No. 006/2015. Judgment of 23131 2018, Nguza Viking (Babu Seya) and Johnson Nguza (Papi Kocha) v. United Republic of Tanzania. para. 53. a Alex Thomas v. Tanzama Judgment. op. cit. para. 60. 5 ldem. paras. 60-65; Application No. 007/2013. Judgment of 3/6/2016, Mohamed Abubakari v. tJnited Republic of Tanzania. paras. 65-72; Application No. 01 112015. Judgment of 28t0912017 , Christopher Jonas !7 a