355. In light of the foregoing, the Court finds that the Respondent State violated Article 16 of the Charter and Article 24 of the CRC for failing to provide the highest attainable standard of health to PWA. H. Violation of Article 1 of the Charter 356. Article 1 of the Charter provides as follows: The Member States of the Organisation of African Unity, parties to the present Charter shall recognise the rights, duties and freedoms enshrined in the Charter and shall undertake to adopt legislative or other measures to give effect to them. 357. The Court notes that the Respondent State has “an obligation to make laws in line with the intents and purposes of the Charter.” And “… whilst the said clause envisages the enactment of rules and regulations for the enjoyment of rights enshrined therein, such rules and regulations may not be allowed to nullify the very rights and liberties they are to regulate.”101 358. The Court reiterates its earlier judgments, that, examining an alleged violation of Article 1 of the Charter involves a determination not only of whether the measures adopted by the Respondent State are available but also if these measures were implemented in order to achieve the intended object and purpose of the Charter.102 Consequently, whenever a substantive right of the Charter is violated due to the Respondent State’s failure to meet these obligations, Article 1 will be found to have been violated. 359. In the present case, the Court has found that the Respondent State has violated Articles 2, 4, 5, 7(1), 16, 17(1) of the Charter. The Court observes that the violations herein especially relate to the Respondent State’s failure 101 Legal and Human Rights Centre and Another v. Tanzania (merits), supra, § 160. Armand Guehi v. Tanzania (merits and reparations), supra, §§ 149-150 and Ally Rajabu and Others v. United Republic of Tanzania (merits and reparations) (28 November 2019) 3 AfCLR 539, § 124. 102 81