non discrimination. 180. Based on the above, the African Commission concludes that there has been a violation of Article 3 by the Respondent State. Alleged violation of Article 5 (Prohibition of Torture and Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment) 181. Article 5 of the African Charter states that: Every individual shall have the right to the respect of the dignity inherent in a human being and to the recognition of his legal status. All forms of exploitation and degradation of man particularly slavery, slave trade, torture, cruel and inhuman or degrading punishment and treatment shall be prohibited. 182. The Complainants argue that the treatment received by the Victims on 25 May 2005 amounted to a violation of their dignity and to inhuman and degrading treatment. They sustain that the Victims were physically and verbally assaulted, sexually assaulted and abused during the protest, adding that there was a violation of their dignity because the assaults were severe and gravely humiliating, in violation of Article 5 of the African Charter. 183. The Complainants further submit that since the State authorities failed in their obligation to protect the Victims from sexual harassment, assault, abuse and harm from NDP supporters and members of the Riot police, it failed in its positive obligation to prevent cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment and investigate the allegations impartially. 184. The Respondent State does not provide any substantial arguments to contend the allegations of the Complainants that the treatment subjected by the Victims was inhuman and degrading. It only submits that "The Egyptian society rejects any form of degrading or inhuman treatment." Concerning failure to investigate, the Respondent State argues that investigations were carried out by the PPO after the incident which concluded the existence of the crime of sexual molestation, which includes exposing private parts, sexual harassment and touching the genitals. 185. They argue that the element of criminal intention was not established in this offence as the injuries sustained by the Victims were as a result of battery and clashes, adding that the PPO investigations concluded that the perpetrators were unknown. 186. Before the African Commission determines whether the acts inflicted on the Victims amounted to inhuman and degrading treatment, and whether there was pain and suffering, it will first of all attempt to define the term 'inhuman and degrading treatment.' 187. The African Commission's jurisprudence has established the scope of inhuman and degrading treatment, which does not only include physical and psychological suffering. In International Pen and Others v. Nigeria, for instance, the African Commission held that: Article 5 of the African Charter prohibits not only torture, but also cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. This includes not only actions which cause serious physical or psychological suffering, but which humiliate the individual or force him or her to act against his will or conscience.56 188. The African Commission has also noted that violations under Article 5 of the African Charter should also be established based on the circumstances of each case. In Curtis Doebbler v Sudan, the African Commission ruled that: While ultimately whether an act constitutes inhuman degrading treatment or punishment depends on the circumstances of the case. The African Commission has stated that the prohibition of torture, cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment is to be interpreted as widely as possible to encompass the widest possible array of physical and mental abuses.57 189. Similarly, in Media Rights Agenda v Nigeria, the African Commission held that the term "Cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment and treatment is to be interpreted so as to extend to the widest possible protection against abuses, whether physical or mental."58 190. Furthermore, since inhuman and degrading treatment also impacts on the dignity of a person, the African commission held in Purohit and Moore v. The Gambia cited by the Complainants that: Human dignity is an inherent basic right to which all human beings, regardless of their mental capabilities or disabilities as the case may be, are entitled to without discrimination. It is therefore an inherent right which every human being is obliged to respect by all means possible and on the other hand it confers a duty on every human being to respect this right.59 191. Further, Article 16(1) of the UN Convention Against Torture, calls on States to: Undertake to prevent in any territory under its jurisdiction other acts of cruet inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment which do not amount to torture as defined in article I, when such acts are committed by or at the instigation of or 17