iv. Failure to try the Applicants within a reasonable time; v. Using a coerced confession to convict and sentence the Applicants to death; and vi. Failure of the District Magistrates to conduct prompt investigations into the alleged cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment of the Applicants. i. On the failure to facilitate consular services 69. The Applicants allege that the Respondent State violated their rights as provided under Article 7(1)(c) of the Charter as read together with Article 36(1) of the VCCR insofar as it failed to notify the Embassy of the Republic of Burundi in Tanzania of their arrest so they could benefit from consular services. 70. They aver that the Embassy of the Republic of Burundi in Tanzania only became aware of their case in 2018, when it was alerted by the lawyer of the First Applicant. Therefore, the Respondent State failed to comply with its obligation, under Article 36(1)(b) of the VCCR and Article 34 of the Guidelines on the Conditions of Arrest, Police Custody and Pre-Trial Detention in Africa adopted by the African Commission, to inform them that they had the right to (a) have the Burundian Embassy informed of their arrest, and (b) communicate with the Embassy in relation to their case. The Applicants further aver that the Respondent’s State’s obligations as a matter of international law should be felt most strongly by those vulnerable members of society most in need of protection. Instead, they suffered serious prejudice as a result of their status as refugees and foreign nationals. 71. Additionally, they contend that had the Respondent State notified the Burundian Embassy, the Ambassador of Burundi to Tanzania could have, inter alia: (a) arranged for them to be provided with an interpreter, (b) facilitated contact with their family members and potential defence witnesses to testify in the original proceedings; and (c) provided consular 21