fear of reprisal19 and the use of extra-ordinary remedies.20 Nevertheless,
these circumstances must be proven.
59. In the instant case, the Applicants exhausted local remedies on 29 July
2013 when the Court of Appeal dismissed their appeal against their
conviction and sentence. The Applicants subsequently filed their separate
Applications on 26 February 2016, which means they approached the Court
after a period of two (2) years, six (6) months, and twenty-eight (28) days
had elapsed from the date of exhaustion of local remedies. Thus, the issue
at hand is whether this time frame is reasonable in the context of Article
56(6) of the Charter, as read together with Rule 50(2)(f) of the Rules.
60. In line with the case-by-case approach, the Court has previously held that
five (5) years, one (1) month and twelve (12) days,21 five (5) years, one (1)
month and thirteen (13) days22 four (4) years, nine (9) months and twentythree (23) days,23 four (4) years, eight (8) months and thirty (30) days,24 was
a reasonable time in respect of applications filed by lay, indigent and
incarcerated applicants.
61. The Applicants in the instant case are in a comparable situation to the
applicants in the foregoing cases. It is clear from the record that they are lay
and incarcerated and, therefore, with limited access to information and were
self-represented when filing their Application. The Court also notes that the
Applicants did not have legal representation at the domestic level, and thus
may have been unsure of the next course of action to take after the Court
of Appeal had dismissed their joint appeal. Furthermore, the Second
19
Association Pour le Progrès et la Defense des droits des Femmes Maliennes and the Institute for
Human Rights and Development in Africa v. Republic of Mali (merits) (11 May 2018) 2 AfCLR 380, §
54.
20 Guehi v. Tanzania (merits and reparations), supra, § 56; Werema and Werema v. Tanzania (merits),
supra, § 49; Alfred Agbessi Woyome v. Republic of Ghana (merits and reparations) (28 June 2019) 3
AfCLR 235, §§ 83-86.
21 Jonas v. Tanzania (merits), supra, § 55.
22 Ramadhani v. Tanzania (merits), supra, § 49.
23 Cheusi v. Tanzania (merits and reparations), supra, § 71.
24 Thobias Mangara Mango and Shukurani Masegenya Mangov. United Republic of Tanzania (merits)
(11 May 2018) 2 AfCLR 314, § 55.
17