i. Alleged violation of the right to be tried within a reasonable time 51. The Applicant alleges that pre-trial detention of five (5) years is an unreasonably long period, which constitutes a violation of his right to be tried within a reasonable time as he was arrested on 27 August 2007 and his trial only commenced on 30 November 2012. The Applicant submits that such time was unreasonable because his case was not complex, and the delay was attributable to the Respondent State. In substantiating his allegations, the Applicant avers that the Respondent State’s undue delay in bringing him before the domestic courts was prejudicial to him as it undermined his ability to challenge stale and contradictory witness testimony, and impaired his ability to defend himself against the charges. 52. Furthermore, the Applicant submits that the undue delay was also prejudicial to him as the prosecution’s evidence was based almost exclusively on the accounts of three (3) witnesses who were asked to recall and testify on matters that occurred five (5) years prior, casting doubt on their plausibility. 53. The Respondent State did not make any submission in respect of these allegations. *** 54. Article 7(1)(d) of the Charter provides that: “Every individual shall have the right to have his cause heard. This comprises the right to be tried within a reasonable time …”. 55. In Wilfred Onyango Nganyi and Others v. United Republic of Tanzania, this Court has held that the right to be tried within a reasonable time is an important aspect of fair trial.19 The Court further held that the right to a fair 19 Nganyi and Others v. Tanzania (merits), supra, § 127; and Benedicto Daniel Mallya v. United Republic of Tanzania (merits and reparations) (26 September 2019) 3 AfCLR 482, § 48. 15