apply the provisions of the Respondent State’s Constitution cited by the Applicant.25 A. Alleged violation of the right to have one’s cause heard 80. The Court observes, from the record, that the Applicant raises five (5) grievances against the domestic courts whose actions or omissions he claims violated his right to be heard as protected under Article 7(1) of the Charter. These grievances are: i. That he was not tried within a reasonable time, contrary to Article 7(1)(d) of the Charter, as he spent four and a half years in prison before his trial case was finished. ii. That he was not granted legal representation, contrary to Article 7(1)(c) of the Charter. iii. That the Court of Appeal of the Respondent State did not properly examine and evaluate the evidence in the appeal proceedings, contrary to his right to have his cause heard, protected under Article 7(1) of the Charter. iv. That the Court of Appeal of the Respondent State did not analyse the Applicant’s twelve (12) different grounds of appeal during the appeal proceedings and instead boiled them down to one ground only, contrary to his right to have his cause heard, protected under Article 7(1) of the Charter and which was also in violation of Article 3(2) of the Charter. v. That the Applicant, in the absence of legal representation, was not informed about Section 194(4) and (5) of the Criminal Procedure Act concerning the defence of alibi, contrary to his right to defence, protected under Article 7(1)(c). 81. The Court will proceed to examine these five (5) grievances in light of Article 7(1) of the Charter. 25 Sijaona Chacha Machera v. United Republic of Tanzania, ACtHPR, Application No. 035/2017 Judgment of 22 September 2022 (Merits), § 42. 20