i. Dismisses the objection to its material jurisdiction; ii. Declares that it has jurisdiction. On admissibility iii. Dismisses objection to admissibility; iv. Declares that the Application is admissible. On merits v. Finds that the Respondent State did not violate the Applicant’s right to dignity contrary to Article 5 of the Charter by allegedly not providing him medical treatment for his self-inflicted physical injury; vi. Finds that the Respondent State did not violate the Applicant’s right to a fair trial under Article 7 of the Charter by allegedly convicting him based on unreliable evidence and involuntary confession; By a majority of eight (8) for, and two (2) against, Justices Blaise TCHIKAYA and Dumisa B. NTSEBEZA dissenting vii. Finds that the Respondent State did not violate the Applicant’s right to dignity under Article 5 of the Charter allegedly by placing him in inhumane prison conditions and on death row; viii. Finds that the Respondent State violated the Applicant’s right to life protected by Article 4 of the Charter by imposing a mandatory death penalty, regardless of the subsequent act of clemency commuting the sentence to life imprisonment; Unanimously ix. Finds that the Respondent State violated the Applicant’s right to be tried within a reasonable time under Article 7 (1) (d) of the Charter. 55