as his right to a fair trial, namely his right to the retroactive imposition of lighter penalties, protected under Article 15(1) of the ICCPR, and Article 17(3) of the ACRWC as read jointly with Article 40(1) of the CRC. The Second Applicant is therefore entitled to moral damages as there is a presumption that he has suffered some form of moral prejudice as a result of the said violation.48 125. In instances where free legal assistance was not availed by the Respondent State, where an applicant was charged with a serious offence, and where there were no extenuating circumstances, this Court, as a matter of practice, has granted applicants an amount of Three Hundred Thousand Tanzanian Shillings (TZS 300,000).49 126. The Court notes that in the present Application, in addition to violation of the right to free legal assistance, the Respondent State also denied the Second Applicant his right to a more lenient sentence and his age be considered in sentencing him. Further, the Second Applicant has served 24 years in jail as at the time of the present judgment while he ought not to have been sentenced to time in jail in the first place. This fact has inevitably exacerbated the prejudice that he suffered. 127. Consequently, given the circumstances of this case, and exercising its discretion in equity, the Court awards the Second Applicant the amount of One Million Tanzanian Shillings (TZS 1,000,000) for moral prejudice he suffered as a result of the violations established. 48 Cheusi v. Tanzania (merits and reparations), supra § 151. Evarist v. Tanzania (merits and reparations), supra, § 90; Anaclet Paulo v. United Republic of Tanzania (merits and reparations) (21 September 2018) 2 AfCLR 446, § 11 and Jonas v. Tanzania (reparations), supra, § 25. 49 32