iii. Alleged failure to allow the Applicant's to present an a/ibj defence 95.The Applicant alleges that he informed the District Magistrate Court of his intention to call a witness to corroborate his alibi, but the request was refused. He further asserts that he was deprived of his right to a fair trial in as much as the District Magistrate Court, the High Court and the Court of Appeal did not take his alibi defence into account. 96. The Respondent State did not respond to this allegation. 97. The Court notes that an alibi can be an important element of evidence for one’s defence. The alibi defence is implicit in the right of a fair trial and should be thoroughly examined and possibly set aside, prior to a guilty verdict.” In its judgment in Mohamed Abubakari v. Tanzania, this Court observed that: Where an alibi is established with certitude, it can be decisive in the determination of the guilt of the accused. This issue was all the more crucial especially as, in the instant case, the indictment of the Applicant relied on the statements of a single witness, and that no identification parade was conducted.” 98.In the instant case, the Court notes from the District judgment in the first case, that the Applicant had alleging that he was at work at the time when Magistrate Court’s raised the alibi defence the pick-up vehicle was allegedly stolen. The Court further notes that the District Magistrate Court, the High Court and the Court of Appeal considered his alibi defence but found that it lacked merit in view of the irrefutable testimony of PW2 and PW3. Considering the 28Mohamed Abubakari v. United Republic of Tanzania (merits), § 191, and Kennedy Owino Onyachi and Another v. United Republic of Tanzania (merits), § 93. Ibid, § 93. 28