published on the official website of the Respondent State’s Judiciary.17 It appears from the reading of the said judgment that the MSCA indeed provided reasoning for its decision as evidenced on page 12. 89. Therefore, this Court finds that there was no violation of Article 7(1) of the Charter read together with Article 14(1) of the ICCPR, Article 8 of the UDHR, and Part A, Article 2(i) of the Fair Trial Guidelines regarding the right to reasoned court’s decision. IX. REPARATIONS 90. The Applicant prays the Court to find that the Respondent State violated his right to fair trial guaranteed under relevant human rights instruments and such violation has occasioned miscarriage of justice, order for restitution by way of restoration of his liberty and/or release from prison, and order for compensation to be assessed by the Court. * 91. The Respondent State did not file any response. *** 92. Article 27(1) of the Protocol provides that: “if the Court finds that there has been violation of a human or peoples’ rights, it shall make appropriate orders to remedy the violation, including the payment of fair compensation or reparation.” 93. In the instant case, given that no violation has been found, the Court holds that no reparations are warranted. The Court, therefore, dismisses the Applicant’s prayer for reparations. 17 Misozi Charles Chanthunya v. The Republic, Criminal Appeal no 1 of 2021 (Malawi Supreme Court of Appeal) (Judgment) (14th July 2021). 21