*** 97. Article 7(1) of the Charter provides that “[e]very individual shall have the right to have his cause heard”. Article 7 of the Charter, in its entirety, provides guarantees that are, centrally, meant to ensure the realization of the right to a fair trial. These include the right to be tried by an impartial tribunal as well as the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty by a competent court. 98. In the present Application, the Court observes that the Applicant is questioning the manner in which the domestic Courts, particularly the High Court, assessed and admitted evidence against him. In so far as the Applicant is inviting the Court to consider the manner in which the domestic Courts dealt with evidential matters, the Court recalls that it has previously held that: …domestic Courts enjoy a wide margin of appreciation in evaluating the probative value of a particular evidence. As an international human rights Court, the Court cannot take up this role from the domestic Courts and investigate the details and particulars of evidence used in domestic proceedings.25 99. The Court notes, from the record, that the High Court convicted the Applicant while relying on testimonies provided by five prosecution witnesses, coupled with three items of documentary evidence including the Applicant’s confession statement and two other exhibits. It is noteworthy that the statements offered by the prosecution witnesses PW1 and PW2 were very similar to the confession statement made by the Applicant. Given that the Applicant repudiated his confession statement, the High Court conducted a trial within a trial to determine the admissibility of the confession statement and the other evidence submitted by the prosecution. 25 Isiaga v. Tanzania (merits), supra, § 65. 23