C. Alleged violation of the right to dignity 100. The Applicants allege that the Respondent State violated their right to dignity by the mandatory imposition of the death penalty and also due to the prescribed method of execution in the Respondent State, which is hanging. 101. The Respondent State submits that the Applicants’ submission has no merit and should be dismissed. It also submits that there is no “evidence nor do the Applicants allege that their dignity was violated by the state apparatus during investigation, restraint or in the execution of their sentence.” *** 102. The Court notes that Article 5 of the Charter provides: 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, inhuman or degrading punishment and treatment shall be prohibited. 103. The Court recalls that the question of execution by hanging, in the Respondent State, has previously been dealt with.40 Given that there is no information to suggest that the legal situation in the Respondent State has changed, the Court finds that it must simply reiterate its previous findings on this matter. As previously stated, the implementation of the death penalty by hanging is “inherently degrading” and “encroaches upon dignity in respect of the prohibition of […] cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment”.41 Rajabu and Others v. Tanzania, ibid, §§ 119-120; Henerico v. Tanzania, ibid, §§ 169-170; Juma v. Tanzania, ibid, §§ 135-136. 41 Rajabu v. Tanzania (merits and reparations), supra, §§ 119-120. 40 27