documentary proof to support the Applicant’s claims, the Court dismisses the prayer for reparation for material prejudice. 151. In relation to the claim for legal costs, the Court recalls its established case-law that reparations paid to victims of human rights violations may also include the reimbursement of lawyers’ fees.52 However, in the present case, the Court finds that the Applicant has failed to provide evidence in support of her request for reimbursement of legal costs. Consequently, the Court dismisses the Applicant’s prayer on this point. ii. Moral prejudice 152. The Applicant prays the Court to award her reparations for moral prejudice based on two pleas. The first relates to the disruption of her life plan due to her arrest, conviction and detention on death row. The Applicant submits that prior to the criminal proceedings against her, she had set up a charity for fighting against female genital mutilation. She further avers that she also worked with local women’s groups. Further, she submits that her incarceration has separated her from her family and friends as well as her daughter. In the second plea, the Applicant submits that the eight (8) years on death row have been traumatic and particularly hard on her due to her advanced age and illness. 153. In light of the above, the Applicant prays the Court to grant her: i. Based on precedent awards ordered in Lohé Issa Konate v. Burkina Faso (Judgment on Reparations), Decision of 3 June 2016, Application No. 4 of 2013, a lump sum of Twenty Thousand 20,000 USD as compensation for moral damage suffered by her, with an additional uplift of ten thousand (10,000) USD in recognition of the exceptional suffering the Applicant endured due to her imprisonment on death row; or 52 Norbert Zongo and others v. Burkina Faso (reparations), § 79; Mtikila v. Tanzania (reparations), § 39. Mohamed Abubakari v. Tanzania (reparations), § 81. 43