A. Pecuniary Reparations 88. The Applicant seeks pecuniary reparation for the material damage which, according to him, resulted from the violations he suffered owing to the Respondent State’s actions. He prays the Court to consider and assess payment of reparations based on national annual per capita income of citizens over the period of the Applicant’s detention. 89. The Respondent State prays the Court to dismiss the Applicant’s claims for reparation, including the payment of fair compensation or reparation under Article 27 of the Protocol. It also prays that the Applicant continues serving his sentence. *** 90. The Court recalls that the only conclusion it has reached is that the Respondent State violated the Applicant’s right to free legal assistance by failing to afford him counsel during the proceedings before domestic courts. 91. The Court notes that the violation found has caused the Applicant moral prejudice and therefore, in the exercise of its judicial discretion, awards the Applicant the sum of Three Hundred Thousand (300,000) Tanzanian shillings as fair compensation.25 B. Non-Pecuniary Reparations 92. The Applicant prays the Court to set aside his sentence and order his release. 93. The Respondent State prays the Court to dismiss all of the Applicant’s claims and to find that the Applicant continues to serve his sentence. 25 Stephen John Rutakikirwa v. United Republic of Tanzania, ACtHPR, Application No. 013/2016, Judgment of 24 March 2022 (merits and reparations), § 85; Anaclet Paulo v. United Republic of Tanzania (merits) (21 September 2018) 2 AfCLR 446, § 107; Minani Evarist v. Tanzania (merits and reparations) (28 November 2018) 2 AfCLR 402, § 85. 20