94.Article 27(1) of the Protocol provides that: “If the Court finds that there has been violation ofa human or peoples’ right, it shall make appropriate orders to remedy the violation, including the payment of fair compensation or reparation.” 95. The Court recalls its established jurisprudence Applications for reparation of prejudices that, “to examine and assess resulting from human rights violations, it takes into account the principle according to which the State found guilty of an internationally wrongful act is required to make full reparation for the damage caused to the victim’ .”4 96.The Court also restates that, the purpose of reparation is to “...as far as possible, state erase which all the consequences would presumably committed.” Measures human include rights have of the wrongful existed that a State could restitution, if that act and act take to remedy compensation and had restore the not been a violation of rehabilitation of the victim, as well as measures to ensure non-repetition of the violations taking into account the circumstances of each case.” 97. The Court reiterates that the general rule with regard to material prejudice, is that there must be a causal link between the established violation and the prejudice suffered and the onus is on the Applicant to provide evidence to justify his prayers.?” With regard to moral damages the requirement of proof 24 Ingabire Victoire Umuhoza v Rwanda (reparations) (2018) 2 AfCLR 202, § 19. See also Beneficiaries of late Norbert Zongo, Abdoulaye Nikiema alias Ablasse, Ernest Zongo, Blaise liboudo and Mouvement Burkinabé des Droits de ' Homme et des Peuples v Burkina Faso (reparations) (2015) 1 AfCLR 258, § 20; Lohé Issa Konaté v Burkina Faso (reparations) (2016) 1 AfCLR 346, § 15(b); and Mohamed Abubakari v United Republic of Tanzania, AfCHPR, Application No. 007/2013, Judgment of 4 July 2019 (reparations), § 19. 28 Mohamed Abubakari v Tanzania (reparations), § 20; Alex Thomas v. United Republic of Tanzania, AfCHPR, Application No 005/2013, Judgment of4 July 2019 (reparations), § 12; and Wilfred Onyango Nganyi and 9 Others v United Republic of Tanzania, AfCHPR, Application No. 006/2013, Judgment of 4 July 2019 (reparations), § 16. 26 Ingabire Victoire Umuhoza v Rwanda (reparations), § 20. 27 See Kennedy Gihana and Others v Republic of Rwanda, AfCHPR, Application No. 017/2015, Judgment of 28 November 2019, § 139; See also Tanganyika Law Society, the Legal and Human Rights Centre v United Republic of Tanzania and Reverend Christopher R. Mtikila v United Republic of Tanzania (reparations) (2014) 1 AfCLR 72, § 40; Lohé Issa Konaté v Burkina Faso (reparations), § 15(d). 25

Select target paragraph3