A. Alleged violation of the right to a fair trial 71. The Applicant raises multiple contentions regarding infringements upon his right to a fair trial. Specifically, he asserts that the Respondent State found him guilty based on questionable evidence and a coerced confession made without legal counsel; he endured an excessively prolonged trial period; he was denied adequate legal representation; and his trial lacked impartiality, whether in actuality or in the perception thereof. The Court will now proceed to address these allegations separately. i. Conviction on the basis of inadmissible and inconsistent evidence 72. The Applicant alleges that he was convicted on the basis of inconsistent and non-credible evidence. 73. The Applicant submits that he was convicted on the basis of involuntary confession that he made without a lawyer. The Applicant states that when he made the confession, he was interrogated without a lawyer by the police. Furthermore, whilst he was being interrogated, he was in extreme physical and mental anguish from torture by the police and the death of his wife and son. He avers that the magistrate who took his confession, undertook a brief and superficial inquiry about his wellbeing. However, the inquiry was not sufficient to determine whether his physical pain and psychological distress impaired his ability to waive his right to remain silent. He emphasises that he was in precarious mental state and that days after committing the offence, he attempted to commit suicide in prison. 74. The Applicant further states that he was not provided with any prompt and comprehensive care after attempting to kill himself. He avers that his untreated physical injuries and mental distress created conditions for his exploitation and manipulation by his arresting officers and by the Magistrate who recorded his confession/statement. 19