E. Violation of the right to dignity 111. Similarly, although the Applicant did not make any submissions on the right to dignity, the Court also notes from the record that the Applicant was sentenced to death by hanging. The Court, therefore, reiterates its established jurisprudence that the execution of the death penalty by hanging constitutes a violation of the right to dignity under Article 5 of the Charter.35 112. For that reason, the Court holds that the Respondent State violated the Applicant’s right to dignity protected under Article 5 of the Charter in relation to the method of execution of the death penalty, that is, by hanging. VIII. REPARATIONS 113. Article 27(1) of the Protocol provides that “If the Court finds that there has been violation of a human or peoples’ rights it shall make appropriate orders to remedy the violation, including the payment of fair compensation or reparation.” 114. Having found that the Respondent State did not violate any rights alleged by the Applicant, the Court dismisses the Applicant’s prayers for reparations. 115. The Court recalls, however, that it has found that the Respondent State violated the Applicant’s right to life and to dignity, guaranteed under Articles 4 and 5 of the Charter, in relation to the mandatory imposition of the death penalty by hanging. 116. The Court, therefore, orders the Respondent State to take all necessary measures, within six (6) months of the notification of this Judgment, to 35 Rajabu and Others v. Tanzania, ibid, §§ 119-120; Henerico v. Tanzania, ibid, §§ 169-170; Juma v. Tanzania, ibid, §§ 135-136. 26