previous judgments17 that accused persons charged with serious offences carrying heavy sentences should be granted free legal assistance as a matter of course. As such, the Court finds that the LA 2017 is not fully aligned with the Charter and its case law. VIII. REPARATIONS 88. The Applicant prays the Court for the following: i. An Order for his release; ii. An Order for his retrial; and iii. Any other Order or remedy that this Honourable Court may deem fit. 89. The Respondent State prays the Court to dismiss the Applicant’s prayers herein. *** 90. Article 27(1) of the Protocol provides that: If the Court finds that there has been violation of a human or peoples’ rights, it shall make appropriate orders to remedy the violation, including the payment of fair compensation or reparation. 91. The Court recalls its earlier judgments and restates its position that, “to examine and assess applications for reparation of prejudices resulting from human rights violations, it takes into account the principle according to which the State found guilty of an internationally wrongful act is required to make full reparation for the damage caused to the victim”.18 17 Thomas v. Tanzania, supra, § 159; Abubakari v. Tanzania (merits), supra, § 236. Abubakari v. Tanzania (merits), supra, § 242 (ix); Ingabire Victoire Umuhoza v. Republic of Rwanda (reparations) (7 December 2018) 2 AfCLR 202, § 19. 18 20