00030 ? law3, he retains the power of control over the time in which to render justice in the interest of all. The view may be held that the Tanzanian judge had been able to assess the merits of the appeal brought before him. 9. Since the time limit had been set, the applicants could have requested an extension of time. They simply suggest that they hardly cooperated in a proper administration of justice. lt is in these circumstances that the Respondent State, concerned about the idea of rendering justice to the victims, was able declare that the Application could not succeed. We are faced in this regard with the assumption from which the idea was forged that the right of access to the courts that benefits the litigants is not absolute; that it has obvious and accepted limitations. This is particularly the case for the conditions of admissibility of an application. The said conditions, by their very nature, call for regulation by the State. The latter has a margin of manoeuver in making assessmenta. This, indeed, have been accepted by jurisprudence and doctrine. These powers of the State are always in a relation of tension between the offense committed and the administration of a just and O proportionate pu nishment. B. The incident introduced by the Tanzania Human Rights Gommission does not prosper 10. An investigation by the Commission for Human Rights and Good Governance (CHRGG) supposedly revealed that the victim had received reparation from the actual aggressors, at the request of the local authorities That procedural incident seemed to show that the conviction of Messers Werema was either wrong or improper. lt is presumably based on a mistake of fact as regards the identity of the true perpetrators of the crimes. The applicants allege that this finding was confirmed by "the unfolding truth". These facts were presumably not mentioned in the records of all the proceedings conducted by the domestic courts. o 1 1. The aforesaid allegations are contained in a letter from the Commission for Human Rights and Good Governance, an organ of the Government of the Respondent State established for the purpose of promoting human rights. The 3 ECHR: Judgment lvanova and lvashova v. Russia,261412017 ECHR: Matter of Luordo v. Italy, 171712003 : "The Court also recalls that the right to a tribunal is not absolute; it lends itself to implicitly accepted limitations, particularly with regard to the conditions of a admissibility of an appeal, because by its very nature it requires a regulation by the State, which enjoys in this respect a certain margin of manoeuvre in making assessment" (,4shingdane v. United Kingdom, Judgment of 281511985, S6rie A No. 93, pp.24-25, $ 57) D, $ 85. 3