previously held,®° the Court's legal assistance scheme is pro bono in nature and thus this claim lacks merit and is dismissed. B. Transport and stationery costs 180. The Applicant also seeks compensation for other costs incurred in this case, that is, United States Dollars Two Hundred (US$ 200) for postage costs, United States Dollars, Two Hundred (US$ 200) for printing and photocopying costs, United States Dollars One Thousand (US$ 1,000) for transportation costs to and from the seat of the Court and from the PALU secretariat to Ukonga prison and United States Dollars Two Hundred (US$ 200) representing communication costs. 181. The Respondent State avers that the Applicant has not provided evidence to substantiate his allegations as regards these expenses. The Respondent State argues that all the charges for service and postage of pleadings were borne by the Court. wee 182. The Court recalls its position in Reverend Christopher Mtikila v Tanzania case, whereby it noted that: "expenses and costs form part of the concept of reparation." The Court considers that transport costs incurred for travel within Tanzania, and stationery costs fall under the "categories of expenses that will be supported in the Legal Aid Policy of the Court’.®! Since PALU represented the Applicant on a pro bono basis, the claims for these costs are unjustified and are therefore dismissed. Alex Thomas v. United Republic of Tanzania (reparations) § 81. ®1 African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights Legal Aid Policy 2013-2014, Legal Aid Policy 2015-2016, and Legal Aid Policy 2017. 49