*** 27. The Court recalls its jurisprudence, that under the terms of Article 3(1) of the Protocol, it has jurisdiction to examine all cases brought before it insofar as they allege violation of the rights protected by the Charter or any other human rights instrument ratified by the State concerned.2 Consequently, it is not necessary for the Applicant to enumerate explicitly the specific provisions allegedly violated; instead, he needs only indicate that these alleged violations pertain to the rights enshrined within the Charter or any other instrument to which the Respondent State is a Party.3 28. In the instant Application, this Court notes that the Applicants clearly allege violation of their rights to a fair trial guaranteed by Articles 7(1) (a) and (d) and 26 of the Charter, and Articles 2(3) and 14 (1) of the ICCPR. It follows, therefore, that the Respondent State’s objection on these points cannot stand. 29. Furthermore, although it is for national courts to examine issues of evidence, this Court has jurisdiction to examine the relevant proceedings before national courts to determine whether they comply with the standards prescribed in the Charter or in any other instrument ratified by the State concerned.4 In so doing, it cannot be considered that this Court censures the decisions of national courts. The Respondent State’s objection on this point is also dismissed. 2 Alex Thomas v. United Republic of Tanzania (merits) (20 November 2015) 1 AfCLR 465, § 45; Kennedy Owino Onyachi and Charles John Mwanini Njoka v. United Republic of Tanzania (merits) (28 September 2017) 2 AfCLR 65, §§ 34-36; Jibu Amir alias Mussa and Saidi Ally Mang’aya v. United Republic of Tanzania (merits and reparations) (28 November 2019) 3 AfCLR 629, § 18; Abdallah Sospeter Mabomba v. United Republic of Tanzania, AfCHPR, Application No. 017/2017, Judgment of 22 September 2022 (jurisdiction and admissibility), § 21. 3 Peter Joseph Chacha v. United Republic of Tanzania (admissibility) (28 March 2014) 1 AfCLR 398, § 118. 4 Kennedy Ivan v. United Republic of Tanzania (merits) (March 2019), 3 AfCLR 48, § 26; Armand Guéhi v. United Republic of Tanzania (merits and reparations) (7 December 2018), 2 AfCLR 477, § 33; Nguza Viking (Babu Seya) and Johnson Nguza (Papi Kocha) v. United Republic of Tanzania (merits) (23 March 2018), 2 AfCLR 287, § 35. 7