76. The Court considers that in the circumstances of the case, and in the interests of justice, the Applicant should have been afforded free legal assistance during the trial proceedings and on appeal. 77. In the light of the foregoing, the Court finds that the Respondent State failed to comply with its obligations under Article 7(1)(c) of the Charter, read in conjunction with Article 14(3)(d) of the ICCPR, by failing to afford the Applicant free legal assistance in the proceedings before domestic courts. VIII. REPARATIONS 78. The Applicant prays the Court to grant him reparations for the violations he suffered, to vacate the conviction and sentence against him, and to order his release. 79. The Respondent State prays the Court to dismiss the Applicant’s request for reparations. *** 80. The Court observes that Article 27(1) of the Protocol provides: If the Court finds that there has been a violation of a human or peoples’ rights, it shall make appropriate orders to remedy the violation, including the payment of fair compensation or reparation. 81. In line with its established jurisprudence, the Court considers that, in order for reparations to be awarded, it must first be established that the Respondent State is internationally responsible for the wrongful act. Secondly, causation should be established between the wrongful act and the harm alleged.21 Finally, where reparation is granted, it should fully redress the harm suffered. 21 Marthine Christian Msuguri v. United Republic of Tanzania, ACtHPR, Application No. 052/2016, Judgment of 1 December 2022 (merits and reparations), § 120 19