Applicant's sureties, he did not enquire from them as to the Applicant's whereabouts. 93. Given the serious nature of the offence that the Applicant had been charged with, the fact that the magistrate had granted the Applicant bail on the basis of his serious ill health and that he was unrepresented, warranted the Court to have more consideration for the Applicant and adjourn the proceedings to give him the opportunity to defend himself. 94. It is also important to note that, from the record, the Applicant was never prosecuted for jumping bail. This would suggest that the court was aware of the reasons for his absence during the trial at the time of his defence. It would, in the circumstances have been prudent for the trial magistrate to make an enquiry on the whereabouts of the Applicant, especially because, from the trial record, the Court had knowledge of the Applicant's ill health. 95. The Court is fortified in its reasoning by the decisions of the African Commission and the European Court of Human Rights and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, which are courts of similar jurisdiction. 96. The African Commission considered the right to defenci oneself, in Avocats Sans Frontieres (on behalf of Gaetan Bwampamye) v Burundi and held that the right implies an accused's presence at each stage of the proceedings. 10 10 Communication 231/99 14th Activity Report 2000-2001 paragraph 28.