due to indigence and incarceration must be proved and cannot be justified by blanket assertions or assumptions.24 57. The Court also reiterates its case-law that while exhausting extraordinary remedies, such as the review procedure at the Court of Appeal, which is not mandatory in the Respondent State, the time spent in attempting to exercise these remedies should be considered in assessing reasonableness under Article 56(5) of the Charter.25 58. In the instant Application, this Court observes that the judgment of the Court of Appeal in Criminal Appeals Nos. 128 and 129 of 2007 involving the Applicants was delivered on 5 November 2009. However, as the Applicants could not submit the present Application before the Respondent State had deposited its Declaration on 29 March 2010, the time to be considered should be computed from the filing of the Declaration. Seven (7) years, five (5) months and twenty-nine (29) days thus elapsed between 29 March 2010 and 27 September 2017 when the Applicants filed the present Application. The issue for determination is whether the said period is reasonable within the meaning of Article 56(6) of the Charter. 59. The Court notes that, in the present Application, the Applicants aver that the time to be considered is four (4) months given that they became aware of the existence of the Court only from 13 June 2017 when the first Application from the prison where they were detained was filed in the case of Abdallah Sospeter Mabomba and Others v. United Republic of Tanzania. 60. The Court recalls in this regard that, as it has held in the Mabomba Ruling being cited by the Applicants, a period of seven (7) years, two (2) months and fifteen (15) days is an unreasonable lapse of time before filing an 24 Abdallah Sospeter Mabomba and Others v. United Republic of Tanzania, ACtHPR, Application No. 017/2017, Ruling of 22 September 2022 (jurisdiction and admissibility), § 54 and Anthony Kisite v. United Republic of Tanzania (jurisdiction and admissibility) (2019) 3 AfCLR 470, § 49. 25 Msuguri v. Tanzania (merits and reparations), supra, § 57 and Juma and Another v. Tanzania, (judgment), supra, § 59. 16