time as manifestly reasonable.19 In the present case, the Court notes that the period of time to be considered is that of five months and 28 days, which in the circumstances the Court finds manifestly reasonable. The Application therefore meets the requirement prescribed under Rule 50(2)(f) of the Rules. 50. Concerning the admissibility requirement specified in Article 56(7) of the Charter, the Court notes that the Application does not concern a case which has already been settled by the Parties in accordance with the principles of the Charter of the United Nations, the Constitutive Act of the African Union, the provisions of the Charter or of any legal instrument of the African Union. The Court, thus, finds that the Application complies with Rule 50(2)(g) of the Rules. 51. In view of the above, the Court concludes that the Application meets all the admissibility conditions under Article 56 of the Charter, as restated in Rule 50(2) of the Rules, and therefore, declares it admissible. VII. MERITS 52. The Court observes that in his Application, the Applicant alleges violation of Articles 1, 2, 3(1), 7(1)(b) and 27(1) of the Charter. However, his claims relate only to the violation of Article 7 on the right to a fair trial. He particularly alleges: (A) that he was not provided with free legal assistance throughout the proceedings before the domestic courts and (B) that his conviction and sentence were premised on a charge that was not proven beyond a reasonable doubt and in non-conformity with international law standards. The Court will now in turn, consider the alleged violations as such. 19 Augustine v. Tanzania, supra, § 58. 14