66. The Court, therefore, finds that all the admissibility conditions of Rule 50(2) of the Rules are met and declares the Application admissible. VII. MERITS 67. The Applicants allege the following violations: i. The right to a fair trial protected, under Article 7(1)(c) of the Charter, as read together with Article 14(3)(d) of the ICCPR and Article 36(1) of the VCCR; ii. The right to freedom from torture, cruel and degrading treatment, protected under Article 5 of the Charter; iii. The right not to be discriminated against on the basis of national origin and immigration status, protected under Article 2 of the Charter; iv. The right to equal protection of the law, protected under Article 3(2) of the Charter; and v. The right to life, protected under Article 4 of the Charter. A. Alleged violation of the right to a fair trial 68. The Applicants aver that the Respondent State violated their right to a fair trial as protected under Article 7(1)(c) of the Charter as read together with Article 14(3)(d) of the ICCPR. The Court observes that the claims relevant to this allegation are: i. Failure to facilitate the provision of consular services as provided under Article 7(1)(c) of the Charter, as read together with Article 36(1) of the VCCR; ii. Failure to provide interpretation services as provided under Article 7(1)(c) of the Charter, as read together with Article 14(3)(a) of the ICCPR; iii. Failure to provide the Applicants with effective legal representation as envisaged under Article 7(1)(c) of the Charter as read together with Article 14(3)(d) of the ICCPR; 20