129. He avers that he believes in witchcraft and that before committing the relevant crimes he went to two traditional healers who confirmed that he had been bewitched/cursed. He was informed that his former-in-laws had cursed him and that the curse could lead to his death. When he found out that he was cursed, he began to live with an irrational fear which affected his mental state. 130. The Applicant further states that when he committed the offence, he was experiencing a mental crisis, he felt fear and was panicking at the thought that his family was acting in complicity with his former in-laws, who are well known witches, to kill him. 131. In support of his allegation of mental illness, the Applicant swore an affidavit and also filed expert declarations from two experts, a Medical Doctor and a Clinical Psychologist and an affidavit by one, Sylvester Francisco, who explained the culture of belief in witchcraft in the Sukuma community, to which the Applicant belonged. The experts’ professional declarations suggest that the symptoms the Applicant experienced were consistent with his community’s belief in witchcraft and his attempt to take his life after the incident showed that he was suffering from an acute stress, that is, “a set of emotive, cognitive and behavioural symptoms that occur following exposure to traumatic event”. * 132. The Respondent State did not specifically respond to the issue of mental illness raised by the Applicant, rather it responded cumulatively and in general terms. It avers that the “Court of Appeal did not breach Article 13(6)(a) of its Constitution and Article 7(1)(c) of the Charter, the first Applicant was represented by Counsel both in the High Court and in the Court of Appeal hence there were no violation of the right of a fair trial and the Judgment is in accordance to the national laws.” 33