April, 13 May and 26 May 1997, respectively, and that Advocate Njau intervened for the first time on 9 June 1997, that is, about two months after his arrest. 121. In principle, as the Commission noted in the Matter of Abdel Hadi, Ali Radi and Others v. Republic of The Sudan, the fact of not having access to a lawyer for a long period after arrest affects the victims’ ability to effectively defend themselves, and constitutes a violation of Article 7(1)(c) of the Charter.'® 122. In the circumstances of the present case, where the Court records at the national level make no mention of the Applicant being informed of his right to be assisted by Counsel at the time of his arrest, the Court is of the opinion that the Applicant’s right to have access to Counsel upon his arrest was violated by the Respondent State. E) The allegation that the Applicant was not afforded free legal assistance during the proceedings 123. In his Application, the Applicant further alleges that during the trial at the first instance and appellate courts, he was not assisted by Counsel; that he did his best to prove his innocence all by himself but without success; and that all that caused him prejudice, especially as it was in breach of Article 13 of the Tanzanian Constitution on the right to equal treatment for all. 124. In his written submissions attached to the Application, the Applicant invokes the Criminal Procedure Act of Tanzania on the right to be defended by a lawyer in criminal proceedings and the right to legal assistance, represented, his current predicament should and argues that had he been duly not have been there to haunt his life. 1® Communication 368/09, Decision of November 2013, para 90. See in this regard: - ECHR: Matter of A.T v. Luxemburg, Judgment of 9 April 2015, paras 63- 65. Q, YO 7. — NE for by ¢ goo