0001rs three arguments submitted only the third was relevant, which states that,,... the prosecution has not been able to gather evidence beyond reasonable doubt ...', *** 53. The Court notes that the Applicant's allegation does not relate to Article 3(2) of the charter, as he asserts, which provides that "Every individual shall be entifled to equal protection of the law", but rather to Article 7(1), which stipulates that: "Every individual shall have the right to have his cause heard...,, 54. The Court observes that the question that arises here is whether the pleas raised in the appeal were duly examined by the Court of Appeal in conformity with the abovementioned Article 7(1) of the Charter. On this point, the Court has consistently ruled that the examination of particulars of evidence is a matter that should be left for the domestic courts, considering the fact that it is not an appellate court. The Court may, however, evaluate the relevant procedures before the national courts to determine whether they conform to the standards prescribed by the Charter or all other human rights instruments ratified by the State concerned.s 55'The Court notes that in the appeal before the Court of Appeal, the Applicant raised two issues, namely: the lack of conclusive evidence on the age of fifteen (15) attributed to the victim and the fact that the crime has not been proven beyond reasonable doubt. 56. The Court notes that the Court of Appeal held that the only important matter was whether the material act of rape (penetration) had been committed by the Applicant, and following examination of the same, it concluded that the Applicant committed the act and confirmed the conviction. 57. The Court notes that the Applicant has not provided sufficient evidence to substantiate his claim as to the age of the victim, and has not demonstrated how the voir dire examination would have impacted the decision to convict him. e Ernest Francis Mtingwiv. Tanzania Decision, op. cit. para. 14; Alex Thomas v. Tanzania op. cit. para 130; Mohamed Abubakari v. Tanzania Judgment, op. cit., paras 25 and 26 03212015. KijU| tsiaga v. United Repu blic of Tanzania, Application No. 032/2015. J (hereinafter referred to as"Krjiji lsiaga v Tanzania J udgment") para. 63. I 13 t \_ .----) __-/' L-=.4'- \