000 217 91 . The Court notes that, though Article 7 of the Charter guarantees the right to defence, including the right to be assisted by Counsel of one's choice, the Charter does not clearly provide for the right to free legal assistance. 92. The Court however recalls that its jurisprudence according to which free legal aid is a right inherent in a fair trial, and that when the interests of justice so require, any person accused of a criminal offence must be informed of his right to legal assistance or to be granted Counsel if he is indigent or where the offence is serious and the penalty provided by law is severe.13 93.|n the instant case, the Applicant was accused of an offence punishable by a heavy sentence of 30 years imprisonment and it was in the interest of justice to provide him with free legal aid. This was made even more necessary by the fact that the Applicant claims to be a layman in law and was also unable to pay for the services of a Counsel. 94.The Court further notes that at no time was the Applicant informed that he may request and be provided with legal aid even though the Respondent State does not refute the fact that the Applicant was indigent. 95. The Court finds in conclusion that, by failing to do so, the Respondent State violated Article 7(1)(c) of the Charter. iii. Allegation that the 30 years prison sentence is not provided by Iaw 96.The Applicant submits that the conviction and thirty (30) years prison sentence pronounced against him were based on a non-existent crime and constitute a violation of Article 7(2) of the Charter, which stipulates that: "no one may be condemned for an act or omission which did not constitute a legally punishable offence at the time it was committed. No penalty may be inflicted for an offence for which no provision was made at the time it was committed. Punishment is personal and can be imposed only 13 Mohamed Abubakariv. Tanzania Judgment. op. cit. para. 139. See also Christopher Jonas v. Tanzania Judgment. op. cit. para.77. 22 Ss