12 Furthermore, the accused must be entitled to a hearing. In doing this, the adjudicator must determine whether the person charged has a proper opportunity to consider, challenge or contradict any evidence and whether he is also fully aware of the nature of the allegations against him or her so as to have a proper opportunity to present his or her own case. This principle has succinctly been summarized in the following words. The best way of producing a fair trial is to ensure that a party to it has the fullest information of both allegations that are made against him and the evidence relied upon in support of those allegations. Where the evidence is documentary, he should have access to those documents. Where the evidence consists of oral testimony then he should be entitled to cross examine the witnesses who give that testimony, whose identity should be disclosed. (see Secretary of State of the Home department V. AF (201) 2 AC. 269) per Philips LJ). The requirement of impartiality and independence of the authority conducting the hearing is also important. As it is usually said, the doctrine of impartiality denotes that justice should not only be done, but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done. Accordingly the adjudicatory authority should not have a pecuniary and personal interest in the conduct and outcome of the proceedings. This is because in such a case he cannot be expected to exhibit the highest point of impartially. Justice must be rooted in confidence, and confidence is destroyed when right thinking members of society go about thinking that the Judge was biased. The test as to whether the adjudicatory authority is partial is not the existence of actual bias but the likelihood of it. The appearance of evil should be treated as evil itself. This brief jurisprudential excursion unto the judgments of fair hearing is undertaken for the purposes of positing Article 7 of the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights the fundamental basis of the claim of the