98. The Court, therefore, finds that the Respondent State has violated Article 7(1)(c) of the Charter as read together with Article 14(3)(d) of the ICCPR. B. Allegation of violation of the right to equality and equal protection of the law 99. The Applicant reiterates that the national courts, while examining his case, did not consider all the relevant facts and convicted him on the basis of the improbable doctrine of recent possession and insufficient evidence. This, according to the Applicant, resulted in violation of his right to equality before the law and equal protection of the law contrary to Articles 2 and 3 of the Charter. 100. The Respondent State did not directly respond to this part of the Applicant’s allegations but it maintains, in general terms, that the Application should be dismissed for being unsubstantiated and for lack of merit. *** 101. The Court notes that Article 2 of the Charter enshrines the right to nondiscrimination as follows: Every individual shall be entitled to the enjoyment of the rights and freedoms recognised 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, birth or any status. 102. Article 3 of the Charter also guarantees the right to equality and equal protection of the law in the following terms: 1. Every individual shall be equal before the law. 2. Every individual shall be entitled to equal protection of the law 25