127. The amici also submit that discrimination against PWA manifests as a form of discrimination on the basis of colour and that the hypervisibility of their disability means they are heightened to exposure to abuse and marginalization. The amici conclude that the Respondent State has a duty to protect PWA from harmful stereotypes and ensure PWA have protection from discrimination on the basis of their colour. *** 128. Article 2 of the Charter provides as follows: Each individual shall be entitled to the enjoyment of the rights and freedoms recognized and guaranteed in the present Charter without distinction of any kind such as race, ethnic group, colour, sex, language, religion, political or any other opinion, national and social origin, fortune, birth or other status. 129. The Court recalls its jurisprudence34 that the right to freedom from discrimination is related to the right to equality before the law and equal protection of the law as guaranteed under Article 3 of the Charter. However, the scope of the right to non-discrimination extends beyond the right to equal treatment before the law. It also has practical dimensions in that individuals should, in fact, be able to enjoy the rights enshrined in the Charter without distinction of any kind relating to their race, colour, sex, religion, political opinion, national extraction or social origin, or any other status.35 130. The Court notes that, discrimination is “a differentiation of persons or situations on the basis of one or several unlawful criterion/criteria.” 36 This understanding of discrimination, however, is what is often referred to as African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights v. Kenya (merits) (26 May 2017) 2 AfCLR 7, § 138. 35 Ibid. 36 Actions pour la Protection des Droits de l’Homme (APDH) v. Republic of Côte d’Ivoire (merits) (18 November 2016) 1 AfCLR 668, §§ 146-147; Kambole v. Tanzania (merits and reparations), supra, § 68. 34 31