,s003 0 ?
135. The Court has found that the Respondent State violated the Applicants' rights to
freedom of movement and their right to freely participate in the government of their
country. The reparations claims will therefore only be assessed in relation to these
wrongful acts.
136. The
Court reaffirms its position32 that "to examine and assess Applications for
reparation of prejudices resulting from human rights violations, it takes into account
the principle according to which the State found guilty of an internationally wrongful
act is required to make full reparation for the damage caused to the victim."
33
137. The Court also restates that the purpose of reparation being resflfutio in integrum
it "...must, as far as possible, erase all the consequences of the wrongful act and
restore the state which would presumably have existed if that act had not been
committed."Y
138. Measures that a State must take to remedy a violation of human rights must include
restitution, compensation and rehabilitation of the victim, satisfaction as well as
measures
to ensure
non-repetition
of the violations taking into account the
circumstances of each case.3s
139. The Court reiterates that with regard to material prejudice, the general rule is that
there must be existence of a causal link between the alleged violation and the
prejudice caused and the burden of proof is on the Applicant who has to provide
evidence to justify his prayers.36 Exceptions to this rule include moral prejudice,
32
Mohamed Abubakari v Tanzania (merits) (2016) 1 AfCLR S99 g 2a2 (ix).
Application No. 003i2014. Judgment ot7t1212018 (Reparationi), tngabire Victoire umuhoza v Repubtic
of Rwanda (lngabire Umuhoza v Rwanda (Reparations). gg 19.
s Application No. 007/2013. Judgment ot 4107t19 (Reparations), Mohamed
Abubakari v united Repubtic
of Tanzania $ 21; Application No. OO5/2013. Judgment o'f 4tO7l1g (Reparations), Alex Thomas v tJnited
33
Republic of Tanzania $ 12. Application No. 006i2013. Judgment of 4/07/19 (Reparations), Witfred Onyango
Nganyi and 9 others v United Republic of Tanzania g 16.
35 lngabire
Umuhoza v Rwanda (Reparations). S 20.
36 Reverend
christopher R. Mtikita v Tanzania (reparations) (2014) l AfcLR 72 40;
e lssa Konate v
s
Burkina Faso (reparations) (2016) 1 AfCLR 346, SS 1S.
a