Equality before the law and freedom from discrimination 85. The Applicants allege that their right to equality before the law and freedom from discrimination was violated by the respondent contrary to Articles 2&7 of the UDHR, 2&26 of the ICCPR and 2&3 of the ACHPR which are pari-material. Article 7 UDHR provides thus: “All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination”. 86. The case of the Applicants is that they were not given equal treatment before the law in the determination of their case before the Supreme Court of Ghana in comparison with the similar case of Agyei Twum v. The Attorney- General and Bright Akwetey [2005-2006] SCGLR 732, where a petition was sent to the President to remove the Chief Justice on allegation of judicial misconduct and abuse of power. It is the further contention of the Applicant that the Supreme Court in that case upheld the two declarations sought on the reasoning that since the Chief Justice is a Justice of the Superior Court, for him to be removed from office on the ground of misconduct or stated misbehavior, the procedure laid down in Article 146 of the Constitution of Ghana had to be strictly followed. In that case, the petition was aborted based on the failure of the judicial council to make a positive determination of a prima facie case before setting up the Committee to investigate the Chief Justice and for the publication of the petition to persons other than the President of the Republic of Ghana. 87. As in the allegation of right to work above, the Respondent did not canvass any legal argument to rebut this allegation. The court reiterate its reason above and state that the Applicant is not automatically entitled to its claim nevertheless. The Court will examine the totality of all the facts canvassed to determine whether the legal requirement for a claim of violation of right to equality before the law has been substantiated by the applicants. Whilst not a legal submission, the facts narrated in the statement of defence of the Respondent in the following paragraphs are instructive: 31