000814 VIII. 95. REMEDIES SOUGHT The Applicant prays the Court to restore justice; quash his conviction and the sentence meted out to him; order that he be released and take such other measures as it may deem appropriate. 96. ln its Response, the Respondent State prays the Court to dismiss the Application and the Applicant's prayers in their entirety, as being unfounded *** 97. Article 27(1) of the Protocol stipulates that: "lf 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." 98. ln this respect, Rule 63 of the Rules provides that "The Court shalt rule on the request for the reparation ... by the same decision establishing the violation of a human and peoples' right or, if the circumstances so require, by a separate decision." 99. The Court notes its finding in paragraphs 67, 78 and 87 above that the Respondent State violated the Applicant's rights to a fair trial due to (i) the fact that he was not afforded legal aid; (ii) his witnesses were not heard; and that his conviction was based on insufficient evidence and contradictory statements of the Prosecution witnesses. In this regard, the Court recalls its position on State responsibility in Reverend Christopher R. Mtikila v. United Republic of Tanzania, that "any violation of an internationa! obligation that has caused harm entails the obligation to provide adequate reparation."23 100. As regards the Applicant's prayer to quash his conviction and sentence and directly order his release, the Court reiterates its decision that it is not an appellate Court for the reasons that it does not operate within the same judicial 23 Application No. 01112011. Judgment Republic of Tanzania, para.27 of 1316t2014; Reverend Mtikila v. s