58. The Court notes that in the instant case, the Applicant has failed to prove that he was the victim of unequal treatment before the law, or of unequal protection of the law. In any event, there is no evidence on the record that his case was treated differently from those of other persons in a similar situation.16 59. Accordingly, the Court finds that, within the context of the 2020 elections, the Respondent State did not violate the Applicant’s rights to equality before the law and equal protection of the law, protected by Article 3 of the Charter read in conjunction with Article 26 of the ICCPR. B. Alleged violation of the right to the presumption of innocence 60. The Applicant submits that, in the proceedings brought against him, the Respondent State violated his right to a fair trial notably, the aspect of presumption of innocence. According to the Applicant, the Respondent State violated his right to the presumption of innocence, in particular connection with the electoral dispute. 61. First of all, he avers that on 2 November 2017, the Public Prosecutor of the Abidjan CFI issued a summons for him to appear in court on account of the armed robbery committed at the Central Bank of West African States (BCEAO). 62. The Applicant submits that, as he was then in detention in Scheveningen in the Netherlands in connection with proceedings before the International Criminal Court, he was unable to attend the hearing on 21 November 2017 before the Abidjan CFI or subsequent hearings. As a result, he was tried in absentia and sentenced to 20 years in prison and a fine of 10, 000 000 CFA francs for gang theft and illegal possession of weapons, by judgment of 18 January 2018. 16 Andrew Ambrose Cheusi v. Republic of Tanzania (merits) (26 June 2020) 4 AfCLR 219, § 129. 14