70. In light of the above, this Court holds that the Respondent State violated the Applicant’s right to dignity and not be subjected to cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment protected under Article 5 of the Charter regarding the beating of the Applicant by the police authorities and the failure of the Justice of Peace to order investigations into the alleged abuse and police brutalisation . C. Alleged violation of the right to a fair trial 71. Under the alleged violation of the right to fair trial, the Applicant makes the following claims: i. The violation of the right to effective legal representation as provided under Article 7(1)(c) of the Charter; ii. The violation of the right to be tried within a reasonable time by an impartial court or tribunal, as guaranteed under Article 7(1)(d) of the Charter; and iii. The failure of the court assessors to examine the witnesses as guaranteed under Article 7(1)(a) of the Charter. 72. The Court will proceed to examine these claims respectively. i. On the alleged failure to provide the Applicant with effective legal representation 73. The Applicant alleges that the Respondent State did not provide him with a defence counsel of his choice. Furthermore, that it was inappropriate and unethical for the Respondent State to appoint counsel Kabuguzi who represented the prosecution during the preliminary hearing against him to also represent him during his trial at the Court of Appeal. 74. The Applicant avers that by abandoning two of his grounds for appeal, his Advocate caused a miscarriage of justice leading to a violation of his right to a fair trial. 19