right to a fair trial before the High Court which is a court lower than the Court of Appeal" 42.He further contends that the constitutional petition and the review remedy mentioned by the Respondent are extraordinary remedies which he was under no obligation to exhaust before filing the Application before this Court. 43.The Court notes that the Applicant appealed against his conviction before the Court of Appeal of Tanzania which is the highest judicial body in the country, and that Court upheld the Judgments of the Morogoro District Court and the High Court of Tanzania. 44. Concerning the constitutional petition and review, the Court has concluded from other mafters filed against the Respondent that these are, in the Tanzanian legal system, extraordinary remedies whioh Applicants are not obliged to exhaust before filing their Applications in this Courts- 45,The Court therefore rejects the Respondent's objection to the admissibility of the Application for failure to exhaust local remedies. b) Objection to admissibility based on non-compliance with a reasonable time in filing the Application before the Court 46.The Respondent argues that the Applicant has not filed his Application within reasonable time. While recognising that RLlle 40 (6) of the Rules of Court does not prescribe a speoific time frame for the submission of cases, the Respondent argues that going by the decisions of regional bodies similar to this Court, a period of six (6) months would be a reasonable time limit within which the Applicant should have filed the Application. lt maintains that such was the position of the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights in Michael Majuru v. Zimbabwe, and therefore avers that the period of four 5 Alex Thomas v. United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 005/2013), Judgment of 20 November 2015, paragraphs 6045 ; Mohamed Abubakai v. United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 007/2013), Judgment of 3 June 2016, paragraphs 65-72 ', Wilfred Onyango v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No 006/2013), Judgment of 18 May 2016, paragraph lir 1 i 72 {' e: -)t (l (,r },J/ - Lr' ./ '." /'' .It"