159. In light of the foregoing, the Court holds that the Applicant has failed to provide evidence of filiation between him and the alleged indirect victims. Consequently, the Court dismisses the claims for compensation for the alleged moral prejudice suffered by the indirect victims. B. Non-pecuniary reparations i. Restitution 160. The Applicant prays the Court to quash his conviction and sentence and order his release. 161. The Applicant also prays the Court to make a restitution order, arguing that compensation should be paid in lieu of restitution, given that he cannot return to the position in which he was prior to the decisions of the Respondent State’s courts. 162. The Respondent State, for its part, submits that the Applicant is serving the prison sentence legally and in accordance with the laws in force in the United Republic of Tanzania for the crimes he committed. 163. The Respondent State avers that the Applicant’s prayer to have his liberty restored is misconceived and that the Court lacks jurisdiction to restore the Applicant's liberty. ser 44