documentary proof to support the Applicant’s claims, the Court dismisses
the prayer for reparation for material prejudice.
151. In relation to the claim for legal costs, the Court recalls its established
case-law that reparations paid to victims of human rights violations may also
include the reimbursement of lawyers’ fees.52 However, in the present case,
the Court finds that the Applicant has failed to provide evidence in support
of her request for reimbursement of legal costs. Consequently, the Court
dismisses the Applicant’s prayer on this point.
ii. Moral prejudice
152. The Applicant prays the Court to award her reparations for moral prejudice
based on two pleas. The first relates to the disruption of her life plan due to
her arrest, conviction and detention on death row. The Applicant submits
that prior to the criminal proceedings against her, she had set up a charity
for fighting against female genital mutilation. She further avers that she also
worked with local women’s groups. Further, she submits that her
incarceration has separated her from her family and friends as well as her
daughter. In the second plea, the Applicant submits that the eight (8) years
on death row have been traumatic and particularly hard on her due to her
advanced age and illness.
153. In light of the above, the Applicant prays the Court to grant her:
i.
Based on precedent awards ordered in Lohé Issa Konate v. Burkina
Faso (Judgment on Reparations), Decision of 3 June 2016, Application
No. 4 of 2013, a lump sum of Twenty Thousand 20,000 USD as
compensation for moral damage suffered by her, with an additional uplift
of ten thousand (10,000) USD in recognition of the exceptional suffering
the Applicant endured due to her imprisonment on death row; or
52
Norbert Zongo and others v. Burkina Faso (reparations), § 79; Mtikila v. Tanzania (reparations), § 39.
Mohamed Abubakari v. Tanzania (reparations), § 81.
43