51. Given all the above, the Court, therefore, finds that all the admissibility requirements are met and holds the instant Application admissible. VII. MERITS 52. The Applicant alleges that the Respondent State violated his rights to: equality and equal protection of the law, life, dignity, fair trial, the enjoyment of his family life and free movement as protected under the Charter. The Court will address each of the Applicant’s allegations individually. A. Alleged violation of the right to equality and equal protection of the law 53. The Applicant submits that the Court of Appeal dismissed his Appeal while acquitting the third and fourth appellants although, according to him, the circumstances and facts of the case were similar. This, he contends, is a violation of his right to equality and equal protection of the law under Article 3 of the Charter. * 54. The Respondent State argues that all the accused persons were treated equally and the Applicant was convicted based on the strength of evidence against him, specifically Exhibit EP7. It submits that he was convicted because it was proven that he was found in possession of a box containing the fingers and other tissues of a human being which were later proven to belong to Henry Mwakajila. *** 55. The Court notes that Article 3 of the Charter provides as follows: 1. Every individual shall be equal before the law. 2. Every individual shall be entitled to equal protection of the law 14