France, para 58; and the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights in AfCHPR Application No 005/2013 Alex Thomas v United Republic of Tanzania, Judgment of 20 November 2017, para 104. 58. Under this principle, three elements should be taken into account to access reasonableness of time to conclude judicial proceedings. These elements are: a) the complexity of the matter, b) the procedural activities carried out by the interested party, and c) the conduct of judicial authorities – See Alex Thomas v Tanzania (supra). In Buzadji V. The Republic of Moldova application No.23755/07 Judgment Strasbourg, 5 July 2016 Para. 91 the ECHR held that: “It primarily falls on the national judicial authorities to ensure that, in a given case, the pre-trial detention of an accused person does not exceed a reasonable time”. 59. In the instant case, the Court is of the considered opinion that the matter regarding the Applicant was not one of such serious complexity, to justify the incarceration of the Applicant for 19 months before trial and conviction. After all it was a case of a missing rifle which the applicant himself reported. The Respondent State had the responsibility under international law, to ensure the Applicant was tried promptly. 60. Furthermore, it is instructive that the Armed Forces Act itself has clear provisions with regards to timeline for detention of persons subject to service. Section 122 of the AFA provides: “Subject to the provisions of subsection (2) of this section, the allegations against a person subject to service law under this Act who is under arrest shall be duly investigated within reasonable time and as soon as may be, either proceedings shall be taken for punishing his offence or he shall be released from arrest within 24 hours. 26