001089 44. The Applicant refutes the Respondent State’s assertion that his grandmother wrote a simple letter to the Court and not a proper application. He argues that the grievances raised by his grandmother and the information given in the letter have the force of an application because all the necessary information is contained therein. 45. Still according to the Applicant, there are no technical details governing the filing of an application before the Court. For him, any form of referral is valid, the essential thing being that the referral brings the facts and the supporting arguments to the Court's attention. eK 46.The Court notes that so far as the form or modality of seizure concerned, it has adopted a flexible approach. For example, Ochieng Anudo of the Court in the case of Anudo v. United Republic of Tanzania,4 the Court decided application filed by a simple email and communicated is to admit an as such. In this regard, the Court always takes into account the specific conditions of each Applicant and the circumstances surrounding the filing of the Application. 47.The Court also notes that Rule 34 and Rule 40(1) of the Rules provide some additional requirements as regards the form and general content of an application. Rule 34 of the Rules requires, among other things, that any application filed before it, shall contain a summary of the facts of the case and the evidence intended to be adduced; give clear particulars of the Applicant and of the party against whom the application is brought and specify the alleged violation, show evidence of exhaustion of local remedies or of the inordinate delay of such local remedies as well as the orders or the injunctions sought; and be signed by the Applicant or his/her 4 Application No. 012/2015. Judgment of 22/03/2018 (Merits), Anudo Ochieng Anudo v. United Republic of Tanzania (Anudo Ochieng Anudo v. Tanzania (Merits) § 52. 13 ZA 2 " oO — /\ Vv | o-f FAK ;