Appeal of Tanzania at Arusha, in respect of which he was convicted of armed robbery and sentenced to thirty (30) years' imprisonment. 4. The Applicant alleges that the trial and Appellate Courts wrongfully convicted him because, he alleges that, in accordance with Sections 181 and 387 of the Criminal Procedure Act, the Respondent's courts lacked jurisdiction to try him as the alleged robbery occurred in Kenya. He also alleges that he was wrongly convicted because the charges against him were defective, contrary to Section 132 of the Criminal Procedure Act because, there were inconsistencies between the charge sheet and the evidence. In this regard therefore, the Applicant claims that the prosecution did not prove the case against him beyond reasonable doubt. The Applicant alleges that this is particularly so, with regard to the ownership of the property alleged to have been stolen, the actual property alleged to have been stolen, the value of the property and whether or not the Applicant attacked the complainants with a gun. 5. The Applicant also alleges that he was not given an opportunity to defend himself during the trial. In addition, the Applicant states that, after being denied the right to defend himself and subsequently being convicted for robbery with violence, he was still denied the opportunity to explain the reasons for his absence during the defence, contrary to Section 226(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act. 6. The Applicant further states that he was not provided with a lawyer to defend him during the trial and appeal as required by Article 13 of the Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania and by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, as he had been charged with