000936 41 . The Court notes that the Applicant is in prison, restricted in his movements and with limited access to informatione. The Applicant also did not benefit from free legal assistance throughout his initial trial and appeals. He chose to use the review procedure of the court of Appeal on I September 201410, even though, it is not a remedy required to be exhausted so as to file an Application before this Court. These circumstances taken together contributed to the Applicant seizing the court one (1) year, one (1) month and twenty (20) days after exhaustion of local remedies. 42. Consequently, the Court observes that the time taken by the Applicant to seize it, that is, one (1) year, one (1) month and twenty (20) days afterthe exhaustion of local remedies is reasonable and accordingly dismisses the objection raised' B. Conditions of admissibility not in contention between the Parties 43. The conditions in respect of the identity of the Applicant, incompatibility with the Constitutive Act of the African Union and the Charter, the language used in the Application, the nature of the evidence adduced and the principle that an application must not raise any matter already determined in accordance with the principles of the United Nations Charter, the Constitutive Act of the African Union, the provisions of the Charter or of any other legal instruments of the African Union (sub-Rules 1, 2, 3, 4 and 7 of Rule 40 of the Rules), are not in contention between the Parties. The Court notes that nothing on record indicates that any of these conditions have not been fulfilled in this case. See A/ex Thomas v Tanzania (Merits) $74, Kenedy lvan v Tanzania (Merits and Reparations), $ 56. See Application No. 024/2015. Judgment ol7l12t2O18 (Merits Reparations), W_erema Wangoko v United Repubtii of Tanzania (hereinafter referred to as "Were ma Wangoko v Tanzania (Merits and Reparations)"), g aS, Application tto. OOtlZOt S. Judgment of 7t1212018 (Merits andReparations), Arma nd Guehi v. United hepuniii of Tanzania (hereinafter referred lo as "Armand Guehi v Tanzania (Merits and Reparations)"), $ 56 s 10 72