59. Article 7(1)(a) of the Charter provides that: [e]very individual shall have the right to have his cause heard. This comprises: a) The right to an appeal to competent national organs against acts of violating his fundamental rights as recognized and guaranteed by conventions, laws, regulations and customs in force. 60. The Court notes that the Applicants’ allegation in relation the Supreme Court of Appeal revolves around two (2) issues, firstly, the alleged denial of extension of time to file additional documents; and secondly, on the reconsideration of evidence. The Court will consider these issues in turns. i. Alleged denial of extension of time to file additional documents 61. The Court recalls that the right to have one’s cause heard includes the right to be afforded time to file documents in support of one’s claims. In the case of Evodius Rutechura v. United Republic of Tanzania,10 the Applicant alleged that the Court of Appeal had erroneously dismissed his application to file for review out of time. Nevertheless, he did not substantiate this allegation or demonstrate with evidence the alleged violation of his right owing to the error of the Court of Appeal. He simply asserted that he was sick. The Court found that the manner in which the Court of Appeal dismissed the Applicant’s application to file an application for review out of time did not disclose any manifest error or miscarriage of justice to the Applicant. The Court therefore dismissed the allegation and found that the Respondent State did not violate Article 7(1)(a) of the Charter. 62. In the present case, the Court notes that the Supreme Court of Appeal’s denial of the First Applicant’s request for extension of time to file additional documents was based on the fact that the First Applicant did not put forward 10 Evodius Rutechura v. Tanzania, ACtHPR, Application No. 017/2021, Judgment of 26 February 2021, § § 65-67. 16