ii. Moral prejudice 106. The Applicant claims that his arrest led to the dissolution of his marriage and called into question his reputation, since no one in Tanzania would believe him and as such he would not be able to find a job or apply for any position, chief. including that of village He claims that all these issues caused him suffering, especially, after he learned of the death of his former wife. 107. The Respondent State argues that “there is no proof that the Applicant suffered from emotional harm as argued...” and that for the Applicant to prove emotional harm “there ought to be a medical certificate to that effect.” KK 108. The Court considers that, as earlier found, the violation of the Applicant’s right to free legal assistance is assumed to have caused moral prejudice to the Applicant. The Court, therefore, in exercising its discretion, the Applicant an amount of Tanzanian Shillings Three Hundred awards to Thousand (TZS 300,000) as fair compensation.*" B. Non-pecuniary reparations 109. The Applicant prays the Court to quash his conviction and sentence, and order his release from prison. The Respondent State does not specifically respond to this prayer. 110. With respect to the Applicant's request for his conviction to be quashed, the Court reiterates its jurisprudence that it does not examine matters of fact and law that national courts are entitled to details of address.*? Therefore, this prayer is dismissed. 31 See Anaclet Paulo v Tanzania (merits), § 107; and Minani Evarist v Tanzania (merits), § 85. 52 See Mohamed Abubakari v Tanzania (merits), § 28; and Minani Evarist v Tanzania (merits), § 81. 28