OLq lzorEollzl'zPL6 ^ rhlA J co63lo) Co#3 '1 Joint SeparatMpinion , rtffffll-f,o^o and Justice rujilane R. 1. t, 00031 5' We fully agree with the findings of the majority on the merits of this application. However, there is one particular issue in the judgement which we believe that the majority could have been more robust in its reasoning and eventually order the Respondent State, even if as obiter dictum, to take necessary steps to clarify the doubt cast by the new evidence obtained from the Commission on Human Rights and Good Governance (CHRGG), which is the national human rights institution of the Respondent State. 2. The letter from the CHRGG to the Applicants informed them that the former had established, as indicated in Paragraph 70 of the Judgment, that the true perpetrators of the crime were other persons and who had in fact paid o compensation of six (6) cows and Tanzania Shillings one hundred and twenty thousand (120,000 TZS) to the victim. 3. The Court in paragraph 73 of its decision has observed that the letter issued by CHRGG was not adequate evidence for it to conclude that it would potentially annul the conviction of the Applicants or likely result in a substantially different outcome to the one reached by the domestic courts. This is, as the majority noted, because of the fact that the said letter, indicating that the true perpetrators of the crime in question were others, not the Applicants, was issued following a preliminary investigation by CHRGG into the matter. o However, it should be noted that this aspect was not contained in the letter to the Applicants and was highlighted only in the letter to the Court, perhaps, with the intention of justifying why the Commission could not appear before the Court on this matter. 4. ln their submissions, the Applicants have not indicated that the attention of the Respondent State's judicial or justice authorities was drawn to the letter or that they had an opportunity to undertake a further enquiry on the issues raised in it. This is partly because the Applicants received the letter only in 2011 long t 'llt,'i{ ,fglTs i&