116. The Court is fortified in this position by jurisprudence of the African Commission, which also applies and interprets the Charter, the European jurisdiction and Court of Human applies Rights, which is a Court of similar provisions similar to those being Article 6(3)(c) of the European Convention in the Charter, and the Human Rights Committee which applies Article 14(3)(d) of the ICCPR. 117. The African Commission Avocats Sans Frontiéres (on has, in Communication behalf of Gaétan 231/99 Bwampamye) v Burundi elaborated on this provision in relation to the right to legal assistance.'? 118. The European Court has identified four factors that should be taken into account, either severally or jointly, when determining if the ‘interests of justice” necessitates free legal aid, namely: (i) The seriousness of the offence; (ii) The severity of the potential sentence; (iii) The complexity of the case and; (iv) The social and personal situation of the defendant.?° 18 Communication 231/99, Paragraph 30, 14th Activity Report 2000 — 2001. “The Commission emphatically recalls that the right to legal assistance is a fundamental element of the right to fair trial. More so where the interests of justice demand it. It holds the view that in the case under consideration, considering the gravity of the allegations brought against the accused and the nature of the penalty he faced, it was in the interest of justice for him to have the benefit of the assistance of a lawyer at each stage of the case.” 20 Benham v United Kingdom, ECtHR, Judgment of 10 June 1996, at paragraph 59; Quaranta v Switzerland, ECtHR. Judgment of 24 May 1991, at paragraph 33; Zdravka Stanev v Bulgaria, ECtHR, Judgment of 6 November 2012, at paragraph 38; Talat Tun? v Turkey, ECtHR, ECtHR, Judgment Judgment of 27 March. 2007, of 15 October 2009, at paragraph at paragraph 29. 56; Prezec Biba v Greece, v Croatia, ECtHR, Judgment of 26 September 2000, at paragraph 29. 45