00 0 295 includes the right to be provided with free legal assistance in circumstances where the interest of justice so require.lo 67.1n the instant Application, the Applicant makes a mere allegation, without substantiation, that the Respondent State violated his right to defencg The Court notes from the record that the Applicant had defence counsel at the trial and appellate levels and also that, he was able to testify and iall witnesses in his defence. As observed above, the Court of Appeal also addressed all his grounds of appeal, as submitted by his counsel. 68.|n view of the above, the Court dismisses the Applicant's allegation that the Respondent State has violated his right to defence under Article 7 (1) (c) of the Charter. B. Alleged violation of the right to equality before the law and equal protection of the law 69. ln his Application, the Applicant claims that the Respondent State has violaled his rights enshrined under Article 3(1) and (2) of the Charter by convicting him on the basis of contradictory and "incriminating" evidence. 70.The Respondent State contests the Applicant's claim and prays the Court to declare that it has not violated Article 3 (1) and (2) of the Charter. 71.The Court notes that Article 3 of the Charter guarantees the right to equal protection of the law and to equality before the law as follows: "1. Every individual shall be equal before the law. 2. Every individual shall be entitled to equal protection of the law" r0 Alex Thomas v Tanzania (Merits), S 114; see also Kijiji lsiaga v Tanzania (Merits), $72, Kennedy Owino Onyachi and Another v Tanzama (Merits), $ 104. 18 @''