B. Other conditions of admissibility 39. The Court notes that, from the record, the condition laid down in Article 56(1) of the Charter is fulfilled since the Applicant provided his full identity. The condition laid down in paragraph 2 of the same Article is also fulfilled since no request from the Applicant or any information on file is incompatible with the Charter of the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) or with the Charter. The Application does not contain any disparaging or insulting language towards the State concerned, which makes it consistent with the requirement of Article 56(3) of the Charter. Regarding the condition contained in paragraph 4 of this Article, the Court notes that the Application is not based exclusively on news disseminated through mass media. The Applicant bases his claims on legal grounds in support of which official documents are tendered. 40. With regard to compliance with the requirements of Article 56(6) of the Charter, this Court reiterates that for an application to be admissible, it must be submitted “within a reasonable period from the time local remedies are exhausted or from the date the (Court) is seized with the matter’. 41. The Court notes, in this regard, that the Judgment dismissing the Applicant’s appeal was rendered the Application was filed at the Registry of the Supreme Court on 8 November 2013 whereas on 24 February 2017. As the period between these two dates is three (3) years, one (1) month and sixteen (16) days, the Court will decide whether this period is reasonable in terms of Article 56(6) of the Charter. 42. The Court recalls, in reference to its jurisprudence, that determination of reasonable time must be done on a case-by-case basis, taking into consideration the circumstances of each case.’ Furthermore, where the remedies to be 8 See Ally Rajabu and Others v. United Republic of Tanzania, AfCHPR, Application No. 007/2015, Judgment of 28/11/2019 (Merits and Reparations), § 50; Armand Guehi v. United Republic of Tanzania (Merits and 11