005063 72.The Respondent State submits that practice and precedent in international human rights law dictates that a period of six (6) months after exhaustion of local remedies is considered to be a reasonable time for filling such applications and this was not the case with the present Application. 73. The Respondent State argues that the assessment of reasonableness of time for filing this Application should be based on the date of the delivery of the judgment of the Review Bench of the Supreme Court, that is, 29 July 2014, 74.The Respondent State avers that the period of almost three (3) years that the Applicant took after the said judgment to file this Application is an unreasonable delay as there were no impediments in this regard. It adds that the Applicant was neither detained, in custody or under house arrest. According to the Respondent State, the Applicant slept on his rights and his human rights were not violated, rather he was aggrieved by the change in Government which further changed his circumstances. 75.The Respondent State notes that between 2015 and 2016 the Applicant won two criminal cases, Criminal Case Suit No. FTRM/115/12 in the High Court of Republic of Ghana, Accra and Criminal Case Suit No. H2/17/15 in the Court of Appeal of Republic of Ghana. 76. The Respondent State avers that subsequently, the Applicant filed an action against the Attorney General at the Court of Appeal challenging a Report of a Commission of Inquiry into inordinate payments made from public funds in satisfaction of judgment debts. The Commission of Inquiry examined, inter alia, the payments made to the Applicant and companies associated with him however, these payments did not relate to the substance of his claim before this Court. The Respondent State submits that it is therefore untrue that the Applicant was unable to file an Application before this Court from July 2014 to January 2017.