35. Concerning the second option, the Court intended to offer the United Republic of Tanzania room for evaluation to enable it to identify and activate all the measures that would enable it to eliminate the effects of the violations established by the Court. 36. The Court specifies in this respect that in its Judgment of 3 June 2016, it did not state that the Applicant's request to be set free was unfounded. It merely indicated that it could order such a measure directly, only in special and compelling circumstances which have not been established in the instant case. 37. The second question posed reads as follows " ... given that these acts have already been carried out, the United Republic of Tanzania would like to understand how to remedy the violation and interpret the term "remedy". 38. The Court clarifies that the expression "all appropriate measures" includes the release of the Applicant and any other measure that would help erase the consequences of the violations established, restore the pre-existing situation and re-establish the rights of the Applicant. 39. The Court further clarifies that the expression "remedy all violations established" should mean to "erase the effects of the violations established" through adoption of the measures indicated in the preceding paragraph. VII. COSTS 40. In terms of Rule 30 of the Rules, "unless otherwise decided by the Court, each party shall bear its own costs." ~0 2J j, If Jj? 101:1-- vfp ~