67. The Court has previously held in its jurisprudence that in determining whether the State has violated or failed to comply with the Charter or any other human rights instruments it has ratified, it does not apply domestic law in making this assessment.18 This Court will therefore not consider the alleged violation of Article 13(1) of the Constitution, but will instead consider the alleged violation of Article 7(1)(c) of the Charter. i. Alleged violation of the right to be provided free legal assistance 68. The Applicant submits that throughout his trial, he was not provided with legal representation and despite being a foreigner. He avers that as a result of this, his rights were violated throughout the trial. * 69. The Respondent State submits that the laws of Tanzania do not provide for mandatory or automatic legal representation for rape cases. Any accused person in need of legal representation has to apply to be provided legal aid and each case is assessed on a case-by-case basis. Moreover, the proceedings before domestic courts do not indicate that the Applicant was in need of legal aid. 70. The Respondent State asserts that legal aid is available at the Court of Appeal and is provided for under Part II Rule 31 of Tanzania Court of Appeal Rules, 2009. Thus, it claims that the Applicant’s allegations are false, since the Government has always regarded all its people as equal before the law, and provided them with entitlements without discrimination, promoted and protected their right to equality before the law. 18 Abubakari v. Tanzania (merits), supra, § 28; Onyachi and Another v. Tanzania (merits), supra, § 39 and Machera v. Tanzania, supra, § 42 18