C. Alleged violation of the right to dignity 66. The Applicant alleges that his sentence to death constitutes cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment in violation of the Charter. 67. The Respondent State argued that the death penalty is “lawful, procedural and constitutional” and that it was imposed in accordance with the law. *** 68. The Court notes that Article 5 of the Charter provides as follows: Every individual shall have the right to the respect of the dignity inherent in a human being and to the recognition of [their] legal status. All forms of exploitation and degradation of [human beings], particularly slavery, slave trade, torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment and treatment shall be prohibited. 69. The Court observes that the concept of human dignity is of profound significance in the realm of individual rights. It serves as an essential foundation upon which the edifice of human rights is constructed. The right to dignity captures the very essence of the inherent worth and value that resides within every individual, irrespective of their circumstances, background, or choices. At its core, it embodies and upholds the principle of respect for the intrinsic humanity of each person and forms the bedrock of what it means to be truly human. It is in this sense that Article 5 absolutely prohibits all forms of treatment that undermines the inherent dignity of an individual.13 70. The Court recalls its judgment that the time spent awaiting execution can distress persons sentenced to death particularly when the duration is 13 Makungu Misalaba v. United Republic of Tanzania, ACtHPR, Application No. 033/2016, Judgment of 7 November 2023, § 165. 16