Judgment No. CCZ 13/2015 10 Const. Application No. CCZ 56/13 I proceed to consider each of the factors in turn. THE LENGTH OF THE DELAY [25] At the time of the hearing of this application, the applicant had been in custody for approximately fifteen and a half years. He had been a convicted prisoner for about ten years. The delay was certainly inordinate and both parties to this application are agreed that the delay was, as far as we are aware, unprecedented and certainly presumptively prejudicial. THE EXPLANATION FOR THE DELAY [26] The reason for the delay has already been touched upon. The original transcript of the proceedings went missing in mysterious circumstances and the tapes used in the transcription were erased – also in unclear circumstances. The trial judge’s own handwritten record suffered a similar fate. The applicant’s legal practitioner’s file containing the notes made during the proceedings also disappeared without trace. When the Attorney –General’s Office availed three notebooks to the Acting Registrar in 2013, to assist in the reconstruction of the record, the third notebook – containing the notes on the judgment and submissions and findings on extenuation, also went missing. It was only after three orders of this Court that a transcript of the proceedings up to the stage of the close of the defence case was made available by the Registrar of the High Court and confirmed as correct by both the witnesses who gave evidence during the trial and the applicant’s erstwhile legal practitioners. Whilst it is by no means clear on the record before us as to when the transcript of the