ii. Restitution 130. The Applicant prays the Court to vacate the death sentence and grant him a new trial that conforms with the fair trial guarantees of the Charter. 131. In the Rajabu judgment cited earlier, this Court held that, because it encroaches on judicial discretion in respect of sentencing, imposition of the mandatory death penalty requires a rehearing on sentence as an adequate remedy.39 The Court had also, in the same decision, found that the sentence can only be re-examined to the extent of its mandatory nature given mainly that the finding of violation does not affect the Applicant’s guilt and conviction.40 132. Although the present Application has peculiarities in respect of the facts, and situation of the Applicant, the findings of the Court in respect of the right to life are ultimately on all fours with those in the Rajabu case. It follows that while the prayer to vacate the sentence is valid in the light of the findings in this judgment, such request should be understood as aiming to set aside the mandatory death penalty but not to provide a blank exemption from sanction, whereas the commission of the offence as adjudicated by domestic courts has remained unaffected in the proceedings before this Court. 133. This Court finds it only befitting to adopt the same remedial approach, and therefore decides to direct the Respondent State to take all necessary measures for the rehearing of the case on the sentencing of the Applicant through a process that does not allow a mandatory imposition of the death penalty, while upholding the full discretion of the judicial officer. 39 40 Ally Rajabu v. Tanzania, ibid, § 158. Idem. 35