133. The Applicant further avers that being held on death row for this period of incarceration is a traumatic experience as it causes him to experience anxiety, dread, fear and psychological anguish. *** 134. The Court recalls that in human rights cases, moral prejudice is presumed once violations are established. The assessment of quantum in cases of moral prejudice must be done in fairness and taking into account the circumstances of the case.71 The practice of the Court, in such instances, is to award lump sums for moral loss.72 135. The Court notes that, moral prejudice is that which results from the suffering, anguish and changes in the living conditions for the victim and his family. 73 As established in this judgment, the Applicant suffered several violations which inherently involve moral prejudice. These include the violation of the right to a fair trial, imposition of the mandatory death penalty, detention on death row, all of them compounded by overall inhuman and degrading circumstances. The Court further observes that in the instant Application, while the death sentence has not been carried out, the Applicant has inevitably suffered prejudice from the established violations. 136. Consequently, the Court awards the Applicant the sum of Tanzanian Shillings One Million (TZS 1,000,000) as reparation for the moral prejudice sustained as a result of the violations established. 137. Regarding the prayer for reparations for his indirect victims, the Court notes that the Applicant has failed to adduce documentary proof to show filiation 71 Juma v. Tanzania (judgment), supra, § 144; Viking and Another v. Tanzania (reparations), supra, § 41 and Umuhoza v. Rwanda (reparations), supra, § 59. 72 Zongo and Others v. Burkina Faso (reparations), supra, §§ 61-62 and Guehi v. Tanzania (merits and reparations), supra, § 177. 73 Mtikila v. Tanzania (reparations), supra, § 34; Cheusi v. Tanzania (judgment), supra, § 150 and Viking and Another v. Tanzania (reparations), supra, § 38. 37