judgments was violated my human rights and … to order the Government of Tanzania to compensate me for the injury which was occurred …”. * 111. The Respondent State prays that the Applicant’s prayers be dismissed. *** 112. 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. 113. The Court holds, pursuant to its jurisprudence that for reparations to be granted, the Respondent State should, first, be intentionally responsible for the wrongful act. Second, causation should be established between the wrongful act and the alleged prejudice. Furthermore, and where it is granted, reparation should cover the full damage suffered.26 114. The Court reiterates that the onus is on an Applicant to provide evidence to justify his/her prayers, particularly for material damages.27 With regard to moral damages, the Court has held that the requirement of proof is not strict,28 since it is presumed that there is prejudice caused when violations are established.29 26 Rajabu and Others v. Tanzania (merits and reparations), supra, § 136; Armand Guehi v. United Republic of Tanzania (merits and reparations) (7 December 2018) 2 AfCLR 477, § 55; Lucien Ikili Rashidi v. United Republic of Tanzania of Tanzania (merits and reparations) (28 March 2019) 3 AfCLR 13, § 119. 27 Kennedy Gihana and Others v. Republic of Rwanda (merits and reparations) (28 November 2019) 3 AfCLR 655, § 139. 28 Norbert Zongo and Others v. Burkina Faso (reparations) (5 June 2015) 1 AfCLR 258, § 55. 29 Ibid. 26