the Application did not meet the requirements set down in Article 40 (5) of the Rules of this Court and should therefore be dismissed with costs against 56. At the Public Hearing, the representative of the the Applicant. Respondent State however recognised that the Applicant finally filed an Application for review in 2013, raising issues of identification and the credibility of the witness who identified him, as well as issues which according to the Respondent State had never been examined by the lower courts because the Applicant seised both the Court of Appeal same time. The representative of the Respondent and this Court at one and the State further pointed out that the Application for review was, in his opinion, an ordinary remedy and that the Court of Appeal should have been able to dispose of it within 24 months. 57. Lastly, at the same Public Hearing, the representative of the Respondent State reiterated that the Applicant had not availed himself of the remedy on the constitutional issue before the High Court, and that the Application for review was still pending before the Court of Appeal. He further maintains that, of all the nine complaints submitted by the Applicant before the African Court, only the complaint relating to issues of identification had been raised at the national level. In conclusion, the Respondent State averred that since it never had the opportunity to examine the other complaints, the Applicant has not exhausted local remedies and his Application should be declared inadmissible. 58. In his Reply, possible, the Applicant indicated after the exhaustion of local that his Application was filed, to the extent remedies given the fact that the only option available to him was being unduly prolonged as the Court of Appeal of Tanzania wasted too much time before accepting his Application for Review No. 11 of 2013. 59. At the Public Hearing, Counsel for the Applicant, relying on the case law of the Commission, argued that the remedies, exhaustion of which is required, are only ordinary judicial remedies, and not the extraordinary remedies available in the Respondent State. 20 Me 4 ee Ke