000294 72. With regard to the right to equal protection of the law, the Court observes that this right is recognised and guaranteed in the Constitution of the Respondent State. The relevant provisions (Articles 12 and 13) of the Constitution protect the right in terms similar to the Charter, including prohibiting discrimination. ln this regard, the Applicant has not indicated in his submissions any other law that runs counter to the essence of the right to equal protection of the law. 73.With respect to the right to equality before the law, the Court notes from the record that the Court of Appeal examined all the Applicant's grounds of appeal and found that they lacked merit. As specified in paragraph 60 above, this Court has not found that the Court of Appeal's assessment of the evidence was done in a manner that infringed on the Applicant's rights to equality before the law and to equal protection of the law. Furthermore, the Court has found no evidence showing that the Applicant was treated differently, as compared to other persons who were in a situation similar to his.1, 74.1n view of the foregoing, the Court dismisses the Applicant's allegation that the Respondent State has violated Article 3 (1) and (2) of the Charter. VIII. REPARATIONS 75. ln his Application, the Applicant, among others, prays the Court to order his release from custody by quashing his conviction. The Applicant also requests the Court to issue any other order for his benefit. T6.Article 27(1) of the Protocol stipulates that: "lf the Court finds that there has been violation of a human or peoples' rights, it shall make appropriate orders to remedy the violation, including the payment of fair compensation or reparation." 11 Application No. 006/2016. Judgment ot 07/12/2018 (Merits). Mgosi Mwita Makungu v United Repubtic of Tanzania, $ 66. 19 Yf<r'<- >---