matter. It is therefore in a position to rule on both the alleged violations as well as all reliefs and other reparations sought in a single judgment. 157. The Court, in line with its previous judgments on reparations, considers that for reparations claims to be granted, the Respondent State should be internationally responsible, the reparation should cover the full damage suffered, there should be causality and the Applicant must bear the onus to justify the claims made 46 158. The Court has earlier found that the Respondent State violated the Applicant's right not to be subjected to inhuman and degrading treatment protected under Article 5 of the Charter and his right to be tried within a reasonable time guaranteed under Article 7(1 ltd) of the Charter. 159. It is against these findings that the Court will consider the Applicant's requests for reparation. A. Order for the Applicant's conviction to be quashed, the sentence to be set aside, and for him to be released 160. The Applicant requests the Court that his conviction be quashed, the sentence set aside and his liberty be restored. He avers that there are specific and compelling circumstances as to warrant the Court to order his release. The Applicant asserts that ordering his release is the only way that the prejudice suffered could be restored given the fact that having a re-trial after (thirteen) 13 years would be impossible since the evidence has been destroyed. 161. The Applicant also urges the Court to take into consideration the fact that he has been incarcerated for many years without the support of his friends and family which is vital for a life in prison. He alleges that his incarceration far from his friends and family increases the damages that he has endured and will continue to endure as long as his incarceration continues. It is the Applicant's contention that his See Application No. 013/2011. Judgment on Reparations of 05/06/15, Norbert Zanga and Others v. Burkina Faso, §§ 20-31; Application No. 004/2013. Judgment on Reparations of 03106/16, Lohe Issa Konale v. Burkina Faso, §§. 52-59; and Reverend Christopher R. Mlil,i/a v. Tanzania (Reparations), §§. 27-29. 46 38