155. The Respondent State argues that any claim for compensation for suffering that the indirect victims might have undergone is not justifiable because the Applicant has not submitted any document to prove the existence of a relationship between him and the indirect victims and there is no connection between the prejudice suffered by the indirect victims and the violation suffered by the Applicant. 156. Relying on the Court's judgment in Lucien Ikili Rashid v Tanzania, the Respondent State further asserts that indirect victims must prove their relation to the Applicant in order to be entitled to damages. The Respondent State submits that, since the Applicant failed to submit a marriage certificate, birth certificate or any document showing the level of dependency or previous record of dependency of the alleged indirect victims on him, there is no causal link between the said indirect victims and the prejudice suffered. ee 157. With regard to the moral prejudice suffered by indirect victims, the Court reiterates its jurisprudence as established as regards indirect victims that, to be entitled to reparations, the indirect victins must prove their filiation with the Applicant. An Applicant's parentage should be proved with a birth certificate or any other equivalent proof; spouses must produce their marriage certificate or any other equivalent proof; the siblings must provide a birth certificate or any other equivalent document attesting to their filial link with the Applicant®’. 158. In the instant case, the Court notes that the Applicant provided the names of his wife, son, mother and siblings, but has not provided any evidence of their identification and proof of his filiation with the alleged indirect victims. 1 Ibid § 135; Alex Thomas v. United Republic of Tanzania (reparations), § 51; Wilfred Onyango Nganyi and 9 Others v. United Republic of Tanzania § 71; Mohamed Abubakari v. United Republic of Tanzania, § 60; Armand Guehi v. United Republic of Tanzania (merits and reparations) §§ 183 and 186. 43