138. The Respondent State did not file any submissions on this point. *** 139. The Court recalls that, where appropriate, it has ordered State Parties to amend their legislation in order to bring it in conformity with the Charter. For example, the Court has previously ordered the Respondent State “to take constitutional, legislative and all other necessary measures within a reasonable time to remedy the violations found by the Court and to inform the Court of the measures taken.”53 In another case, the Court ordered Burkina Faso to “amend its legislation on defamation in order to make it compliant with Article 9 of the Charter, Article 19 of the Covenant and Article 66(2) of the Revised ECOWAS Treaty.”54 A similar approach was adopted by the Court in Association pour la Protection des Droits des Femmes (APDF) and Institute for Human Rights and Development in Africa (IHRDA) v. Republic of Mali55 as well as in Jebra Kambole v. United Republic of Tanzania.56 140. In the present case, the Court, having found that the provisions for the mandatory death penalty, and execution by hanging, contravene the Charter, orders the Respondent State, within Six (6) months from the date of notification of this Judgment, to take all necessary constitutional and legislative measures to amend the provisions of its Penal Code and ensure that they are aligned with the provisions of the Charter so as to eliminate the violations identified herein. ii. Restitution 141. The Applicants submit that “[they] cannot be returned to the state they were before their incarceration but, as a starting point, their liberty can be restored Tanganyika Law Society and Others v. Tanzania (merits), supra, § 126. Konate v. Burkina Faso (merits), supra, § 176. 55 APDF and IHRDA v. Republic of Mali (merits and reparations) (11 May 2018) 2 AfCLR 380, § 130. 56 Kambole v. Tanzania, supra, § 118. 53 54 35