23. With regard to the second objection that the Court is being called upon to act as an appellate Court to deal with matters already determined by the Court of Appeal, this Court recalls its established case-law that although it is not an appellate body with respect to decisions of national courts,8 this does not preclude it from examining proceedings of the said courts in order to determine whether they were conducted in accordance with the standards set out in the Charter or any other international human rights instruments ratified by the State concerned.9 As such, the Court holds that in the present Application, it would not be sitting as an appellate court, if it were to examine the allegations made by the Applicant simply because they relate to the assessment of evidentiary issues. 24. Consequently, the Respondent State’s objection in this regard is dismissed. 25. The Court notes that the third objection relates to whether this Court is empowered to quash the conviction, set aside the sentence and order the Applicant’s release. In this regard, the Court recalls that Article 27 of the Protocol empowers it to order appropriate remedies when it finds that there is violation of human rights guaranteed by the Charter or any human rights instrument ratified by the Respondent State.10 The Court further recalls that, as circumstances of the case may require, it has jurisdiction to grant various types of reparations including quashing a conviction, setting aside a sentence and ordering an applicant’s release from prison where it finds the latter has demonstrated specific and compelling circumstances warranting such an order.11 As such, the Court holds that issuing an order for release where the requirements are met is well within its jurisdiction. 26. Consequently, the Court equally dismisses this objection. 8 Ernest Francis Mtingwi v. Republic of Malawi (jurisdiction) (15 March 2013) 1 AfCLR 190, § 14. Mtingwi v. Malawi, ibid; Kennedy Ivan v. United Republic of Tanzania (merits and reparations) (28 March 2019) 3 AfCLR 48, § 26; Armand Guehi v. Tanzania (merits and reparations) (7 December 2018) 2 AfCLR 477, § 33; Nguza Viking (Babu Seya) and Johnson Nguza (Papi Kocha) v. United Republic of Tanzania (merits) (23 March 2018) 2 AfCLR 287, § 35. 10 Habiyalimana Augustino and Muburu Abdulkarim v. United Republic of Tanzania, ACtHPR, Application No. 015/2016, Judgment on 3 September 2024 (merits and reparations), § 11. 11 Nzigiyimana Zabron v. United Republic of Tanzania, ACtHPR, Application No. 051/2016, Judgment on 4 June 2024 (merits and reparations), § 9. 9 8