69. The Court finds that at each stage of the proceedings before the national courts, the Applicants obtained judicial decisions, without any impediment. It can, therefore, not be considered that the Applicants did not enjoy their right to a fair trial simply because their prayers were not granted by the said courts. 70. In view of the foregoing, the Court dismisses this allegation and finds that the Respondent State did not violate Articles 7(1)(a) of the Charter and Article 2(3) of the ICCPR. B. Alleged violation of the right to be tried within a reasonable time 71. The Applicants submit that their right to trial within a reasonable time was violated without presenting any concrete arguments in support of this allegation. 72. The Respondent State disputes this allegation, arguing that the Applicants erred on the merits of their claim, given that no violation is attributable to the Respondent State. *** 73. The Court notes that, under Article 7(1) of the Charter: “Every individual shall have the right to have his cause heard. This comprises: (d) the right to be tried within a reasonable time by an impartial court or tribunal …”. 74. The Court recalls the general procedural rule that a party who alleges a fact must provide proof thereof. 75. The Court observes that, in the present Application, the Applicants merely allege violation of the right to be tried within a reasonable time without substantiating the allegation. This, notwithstanding, the Court notes that, as it emerges from the record, the following timelines were observed in respect of various domestic proceedings involving the Applicants: five (5) months and fourteen (14) days between the seizure of the Labour Court of Bamako 17