004062 since the alleged appeal of the Attorney General , and that in the very absence of notification of the appeal to the Applicant, the said appeal has no effect on the latter . 205. In this respect , the Court holds that it cannot draw any consequence from a procedure marred by substantial procedural flaws or examine whether it has complied with the requirements of reasonable time. 206. The Court therefore holds In conclusion that the Applicant's allegation is baseless. vi. Alleged violation of the right to two-tier jurisdiction 207. The Applicant contends that the principle of two-tier jurisdiction guaranteed by Article 14(5) of ICCPR, is a component of the right of defence, and is clearly a constitutional principle in Benin law. He argues however that Article 19(2)28 of Law No. 2018-13 of 2 July 2018 amending and supplementing Law No. 2001-37 of 27 August 2002 on Judicial Organization in the Republic of Benin as amended, and the creation of CRIET, deprive him of the right to invoke the rule of two-tier jurisdiction. 208. He alleges that the only remedy available to him against CRIET's decision is cassation appeal. However, according to him, in ruling on cassation appeal, the Supreme Court of Benin has no jurisdiction to re-try the facts , but rather to verify the same and determine whether the law has been respected. 209 . The Applicant argues that the absence of two-tier jurisdiction runs counter to the international conventions that the Respondent State has ratified and that, as such, the point must be made that the law establishing CRIET does not take into consideration the principle of two-tier jurisdiction and violates his right to a fair trial. * y ~n a : theconVsd pe:;:epublic pros orandth"j:f' 0 Article 19 paragraph 2 provides as follows: "The Judgments of the Anti-Economic Crimes and Terrorism Court shall be reasoned . They shall be pronounced in open cou ,and shall be subject to 28 U I ~'(t