discriminated against is linked to the right to equality before the law and to equal protection of the law guaranteed in Article 3 of the Charter.19 111. The Court observes that in the present case, and contrary to the Applicants’ allegations, the expropriation was ultimately followed by compensation at the end of a judicial procedure to which they were parties. The Court also recalls that it has found earlier in the present judgment that the Respondent State did not violate the Applicants’ rights to equality before the law and equal protection of the law guaranteed under Article 3 of the Charter. 112. Consequently, as the Court did not find any discriminatory treatment directed against the Applicants in the enjoyment of their rights, it finds that the Respondent State did not violate Article 2 of the Charter. VIII. REPARATIONS 113. The Applicants pray the Court to order the Respondent State to pay them reparation for the loss of customary rights plus statutory interest, pecuniary reparation, costs of proceedings before domestic courts as well as reparation for moral damage. 114. For its part, the Respondent State prays the Court to dismiss the Applicants’ requests for reparations. *** 115. Article 27(1) of the Protocol provides that: “If the Court finds that there has been a violation of a human or peoples’ right, it shall make appropriate orders to remedy the violation, including the payment of fair compensation or reparation.” 19 African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights v. Republic of Kenya (merits) (2017) 2 AfCLR 9, §§ 137 -138. 28