determining reasonable time are the applicant’s situation, the fact of being incarcerated, being a lay person, not receiving legal aid and being indigent and illiterate. 47. In the present case, the Court notes that local remedies were exhausted on 1 August 2013, when the Court of Appeal Court sitting in Mwanza dismissed the Applicant’s appeal. Since the present Application was filed on 10 May 2016, a period of two (2) year, nine (9) months and nine (9) days elapsed after the exhaustion of local remedies. The issue for determination, therefore, is whether the time it took the Applicant to file the Application before the Court is reasonable. 48. The Court notes that the Applicant is a peasant who could not afford legal representation in the proceedings before domestic courts. Given that the Applicant is a lay, incarcerated and indigent person who did not have the benefit of legal support to aptly understand processes before this Court, it should be considered that the period of two (2) year, nine (9) months and nine (9) days that it took him to file the present Application is reasonable. 49. Given the above, the Court finds that the Application was filed within a reasonable time as prescribed under Article 56(6) of the Charter and as restated in Rule 50(2)(f) of the Rules. The Court thus dismisses the Respondent State’s objection in this regard. C. Other admissibility requirements 50. The Court notes that the Parties do not contest the admissibility of the Application in relation to the requirements of Rule 50(2)(a), (b), (c), (d), and (g) of the Rules. Nevertheless, the Court must ascertain that these requirements are also met. 51. It emerges from the record that the Applicant is clearly identified by name in line with Rule 50(2)(a) of the Rules. 13