and the judgment of the said court; nine (9) months and fifteen (15) days between the filing of the appeal and the judgment of the Court of Appeal; and finally, three (3) years and (3) days between filing of the cassation appeal and the judgment of the Supreme Court. 76. The Court considers that, in view of the nature of the proceedings, the above stated time limits cannot be said to be unreasonable in the circumstances of the present Application. 77. Accordingly, the Court finds that the Respondent State did not violate the Applicants’ right to be tried within a reasonable time guaranteed in Article 7(1) (d) of the Charter. C. Violation of the obligation to guarantee the independence of the courts 78. The Applicants make a general allegation, without substantiation, that the Respondent State violated its obligation under the Charter to guarantee the independence of the courts. 79. The Respondent State submits that, in the instant case, there is no dysfunction in the administrative or judicial services of the State of Mali that is prejudicial to the Applicants. *** 80. The Court notes that according to Article 26 of the Charter “States parties to the present Charter shall have the duty to guarantee the independence of the Courts and shall allow the establishment and improvement of appropriate national institutions entrusted with the promotion and protection of the rights and freedoms guaranteed by the present Charter”. 81. The Court further notes that the Applicants have not specified the facts justifying a violation of this right before the national courts. 18