*** 88. Regarding the prayer that the conviction and sentence should be set aside, the Court recalls its jurisprudence that such prayers may be granted in circumstances where the findings in this Court’s judgment impact the domestic proceedings. The Court notes that the violations established in the present judgment do not impact on the Applicant’s guilt, conviction and sentencing. 89. Consequently, the prayer for the Applicant’s conviction and sentence to be set aside is dismissed. 90. With respect to the prayer for release, the Court recalls that as it has held in Gozbert Henerico v. United Republic of Tanzania: The Court can only order a release if an Applicant sufficiently demonstrates or if the Court by itself establishes from its findings that the Applicant’s arrest or conviction are based entirely on arbitrary considerations and that his continued detention would occasion a miscarriage of justice.38 91. In the present Judgment, the Court did not make any finding to the effect that the Applicant’s arrest and conviction were arbitrary or led to any miscarriage of justice. As a consequence, the prayer for release is dismissed. ii. Guarantees of non-repetition 92. The Applicant prays the Court to order the Respondent State to guarantee non-repetition of the violation against him. 38 Henerico v. Tanzania (merits and reparations), supra, § 202; Mgosi Mwita Makungu v. United Republic of Tanzania (merits) (7 December 2018) 2 AfCLR 550, § 84; Minani Evarist v. United Republic of Tanzania (merits and reparations) (21 September 2018) 2 AfCLR 402, § 82 and Juma v. Tanzania (judgment), supra, § 165. 25