52. The Court notes that pursuant to Article 56(5) of the Charter, whose provisions are restated in Rule 50(2)(e) of the Rules, any application filed before it shall fulfil the requirement of exhaustion of local remedies, unless the same are unavailable, ineffective and insufficient or unless the domestic proceedings thereof are unduly prolonged.15 The rule of exhaustion of local remedies aims at providing states the opportunity to resolve cases of alleged human rights violations within their jurisdiction before an international human rights body is called upon to determine the State’s responsibility for same.16 Moreover, for local remedies to be exhausted, the Applicant must have presented before domestic courts, at least in substance, the claims that he raises before this Court. 53. The Court reiterates its jurisprudence that: ... where an alleged human rights violation occurs in the course of the domestic judicial proceedings, domestic courts are thereby afforded an opportunity to pronounce themselves on possible human rights breaches. This is because the alleged human rights violations form part of the bundle of rights and guarantees that were related to or were the basis of the proceedings before domestic courts. In such a situation it would, therefore, be unreasonable to require the Applicants to lodge a new application before the domestic courts to seek relief for such claims.17 54. The Court observes that the Applicants’ allegations all revolve around issues relating to the proceedings before the domestic courts. These are: being convicted based on circumstantial evidence; the defence of alibi being disregarded; not being tried within a reasonable time; not being afforded the right to consular services; being coerced through torture to record a 15 Peter Joseph Chacha v. United Republic of Tanzania (admissibility) (28 March 2014) 1 AfCLR 398, §§ 142-144; Almas Mohamed Muwinda and Others v. United Republic of Tanzania, ACtHPR, Application No. 030/2017, Judgment of 24 March 2022 (merits and reparations), § 43. 16 African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights v. Republic of Kenya (merits) (26 May 2017) 2 AfCLR 9, §§ 93-94. 17 Amir and Another v. Tanzania, supra, § 37; Alex Thomas v. United Republic of Tanzania (merits) (20 November 2015) 1 AfCLR 465, §§ 60-65, Kennedy Owino Onyachi and Another v. United Republic of Tanzania (merits) (28 September 2017) 2 AfCLR 65, § 54; Karatta and Others v. Tanzania, supra, § 57. 16