00049? 69. ln the context of judicial procedures, the right to equality before the law and equal protection of the law requires that everyone should be treated equally before courts and tribunals. The Applicant has made a general claim that the denial of the opportunity to file an appeal at either the High Court or the Court of Appeal due to the Respondent State's failure to provide him with the certified true copies of the records of proceedings and judgments of the District Court of Bunda has resulted in a violation of this right. 70. The Court reiterates that the Applicant bears the burden of proving this claim,s but he has failed to show how his right to equality before the law and equal protection of the law has been violated. The Court has stated that general claims are not enough to establish that the Respondent State has violated a right.6 71. The Court therefore finds that the Respondent State has not violated the Applicant's right to equality before the law and equal protection of the law provided under Article 3(1) and (2) of the Charter. C. Alleged violation of the right to non-discrimination 72. The Applicant submits that by failing to provide him with certified true copies of the record of proceedings and judgments, the Respondent State has violated his right to non-discrimination as set out in Article 2 of the Charter. 73. The Respondent State disputes this allegation and avers that the Applicant has not proved it. sApplication No.003/2015. Judgmentol 2810912017, Kennedy Owino Onyachi and Another v United Republic of Tanzania, S 1 40; Application No. 005/201 5. Judgment of 1110512018, Thobias Mango Mang'ara and Shukurani Masegenya Mango v United Republic of Tanzania, S 104. 6 Alex Thomas v Tanzanra Judgment, S 140; Mohamed Abubakariv Tanzania Judgment, S 154; Kijiji lsiaga v Tanzania Judgment, $ 86. 18 'q, g6 s