United Nations, the Constitutive Act of the African Union, the provisions of the Charter, in compliance with Rule 50(2)(g). 43. Overall, therefore, the Court finds that all the admissibility conditions have been met and holds that this Application is admissible. VIII. MERITS 44. The Applicant, in the present Application, alleges a violation of his right to a fair trial owing to the manner in which the trial court arrived at his conviction. 45. Although the issue is not expressly raised in this Application, this Court notes, from the record, that the Applicant was mandatorily sentenced to death for the offence of murder.14 Given that this Court has previously adjudicated on this issue, the Court will, therefore, make a determination as to whether a finding in this respect was warranted in the present Application. A. Alleged violation of the right to have one’s cause heard 46. The Applicant alleges that, in arriving at his conviction based on the doctrine of recent possession, the trial judge and the judges of the Court of Appeal relied on circumstantial evidence, which was weak, amounting to mere suspicions and not proved beyond a reasonable doubt. He, therefore, argues that his conviction resulted into a violation of his right to a fair trial. *** 47. Article 7(1) of the Charter provides that “[e]very individual shall have the right to have his cause heard…”. 14 See Deogratius Nicolaus Jeshi v. United Republic of Tanzania, ACtHPR, Application No. 017/2016, Judgment of 13 February 2024 (merits and reparations), §§ 109-112. 11