260. The Applicants argue that by failing to prevent the abduction, sale and trafficking of PWA along with failing to effectively investigate and prosecute the perpetrators, the Respondent State has breached Article 29 of the African Children’s Charter. 261. The Applicants aver that investigation and prosecution in relation to cases of human trafficking are inadequate, leading to a thriving cross-border market for PWA body-parts that sustain high demand and prices. This economic environment, in turn, encourages individuals inside the Respondent State to violate human rights of PWA to supply the said demand. 262. The Respondent State contends that it has put the following legislations in place to combat trafficking: Article 7 of the Constitution, which provides for the freedom of movement; the Anti-Traffic in Persons Act, 2008 which prohibits trafficking; cross-border operation plans between Tanzania, Malawi and Mozambique on combatting the cross-border trafficking of PWA and lastly, the Law of the Child Act, 2009. 263. According to the Respondent State, perpetrators of crimes against PWA have been charged with offences of murder, trafficking and abduction in accordance with its laws, as part of the strategy to combat the exploitation of PWA and promote their human dignity. 264. The Respondent State also contends that it temporarily suspended all practicing certificates of traditional healers who were considered suspects in the trade of body parts of PWA. The Respondent State argues that killing of PWA has been made a “principal crime”, resulting in many witchdoctors leaving the country to neighbouring countries for fear of arrest and prosecution. *** 60