A. Pecuniary reparations i. Material prejudice 102. The Applicant maintains that he was engaged in agricultural and commercial activities in addition to having other sources of income, all of which were undermined by his conviction and his imprisonment. * 103. The Respondent State submits that the Applicant’s request for reparations be dismissed. *** 104. The Court recalls that in order to be awarded reparations for material damage, the Applicant must demonstrate the existence of a causal link between the violation established and the damage suffered.20 The Applicant must also justify the amounts claimed21 and provide acceptable evidence of the expenses incurred, such as receipts for payments made.22 105. The Court observes that in the present case, the Applicant does not specify the quantum of pecuniary reparations sought as just compensation and neither does he establish a causal link between the violations found and the harm suffered. In the circumstances, the Court finds no grounds for awarding pecuniary reparation for the material harm suffered. 20 See Guehi v. Tanzania, supra, § 181; Norbert Zongo and Others v Burkina Faso (reparations) (5 June 2015) 1 AfCLR 265, § 62 and Henerico v. Tanzania (merits and reparations), supra, § 180. 21 Zongo and Others v. Burkina Faso, ibid, § 81; Reverend Christopher R. Mtikila v. United Republic of Tanzania (reparations) (13 June 2014) 1 AfCLR 72, § 40. 22 Christopher Jonas v. United Republic of Tanzania (reparations) (25 September 2020) 4 AfCLR 545, § 20 and Guehi v. Tanzania, supra, § 18. 24