00086? 93.The Court has established in its jurisprudence that moral prejudice is presumed in the case of a violation of human rights and the quantification of the damages in this regard must be equitable taking into account the circumstances of the case.18 The Court has adopted the practice of granting a lump sum in such circumstances.le 94.The Court notes that the violations it has found in the instant case caused moral prejudice to the Applicants. The fact that they were not informed of their right to Counsel and that they did not get legal assistance in the course of their trial at the District Court and appellate courts evidently caused them some moral damage as a result of their lack of knowledge of court procedures and technical legal skills to defend themselves. 95. The Court therefore, in exercising its discretion, awards each Applicant an amount of Tanzania Shillings Three Hundred Thousand (T2S300, 000) as fair compensation.20 B. Non-Pecuniary Reparations 96. Regarding the application for an order of release prayed by the Applicants, the Court has stated that it can be ordered only in specific and compelling circumstances.zl Examples of such circumstances include "if an Applicant sufficiently demonstrates or the Court by itself establishes from its findings that the Applicant's arrest or conviction is based entirely on arbitrary considerations and his continued imprisonment would occasion a miscarriage of justice."22 18 Beneficiaries of late Norbert Zongo, Abdoulaye Nikiema alias Ablasse, Ernest Zongo, Blaise llboudo and Mouvement Burkinabe des Droits de l'Homme et des Peuples v Burkina Faso (reparations) (2015) 1 AfCLR 258, S 55. ls Lucien lkili Rashidi lkili v. United Republic of Tanzania. Judgment (Merits and Reparation) op.cit, lkili S. 119 See Anaclet Paulo v Tanzania (Merits and Reparations) g 107; Minani Evarist v Tanzania (Merits and Reparations), S 85. 21 Alex Thomas v Tanzania (merits) (2015) 1 AfCLR 465op. clf., $ 157; Diocles Witliam v Tanzania (Merits), 5 10'l; Minani Evaist v Tanzania (Merits and Reparations), S 82; Application No. 006/2016. Judgment of 0711212018 (Merits), Mgosi Mwita v United Republic of Tanzania, g 84 KijUi tsiaga v Tanzania (Merits), S 96; Armand Guehi v Tanzania (Merits and Reparations), 9164. 22Minani Evarist v Tanzania (Merits and Reparations), g 82. 20 23