that he has exhausted domestic remedies, and therefore declare his Application admissible. tee 52. The Court notes that pursuant to Article 56(5) of the Charter and Rule 40(5) of the Rules, in order for an application to be admissible, local remedies must have been exhausted, unless the remedies are not available, are ineffective and insufficient or the procedure is unduly prolonged. 53. In its jurisprudence, the Court emphasised that an Applicant is only required to exhaust ordinary judicial remedies." In relation to several applications filed against the Respondent State, the Court has determined that the constitutional petition procedure in the High Court and the review procedure at the Court of Appeal are extraordinary remedies in the Tanzanian judicial system, which an applicant is not required to exhaust prior to filing an application before this Court." 54. In the instant case, the Court notes that the Applicant appealed his conviction and sentence on the count of armed robbery by filing Criminal Appeal No. 45/2006 at the High Court and thereafter Criminal Appeal No. 141/2007 at the Court of Appeal, the highest court in the Respondent State. Both the High Court and the Court of Appeal upheld the decisions of the District Magistrate Court. 55. The Court considers that the 29 May 2009 judgment of the Court of Appeal, the highest court in the Respondent State, demonstrates that the Applicant has exhausted local remedies as regards the first case on the conviction sentence on the charge of armed robbery. Following this judgment, and he was "3 Ibid § 84, ‘4Alex Thomas v. United Republic of Tanzania (merits), § 64. See also Wilfred Onyango Nganyi and 9 Others v. United Republic of Tanzania, (metits)(2016) 1 AfCLR 507, § 95, Oscar Josiah v. United Republic of Tanzania (merits), § 38, Diocles William v. United Republic of Tanzania (merits) (2018) 2 AfCLR 426 § ‘Alex Thomas v. United Republic of Tanzania (merits), §§ 63-65. 17