substantiation as to how the Respondent State’s conduct violated their rights under Article 3 of the Charter. * 113. The Respondent State’s submissions did not address the Applicants’ allegations under Article 3 of the Charter. *** 114. Article 3 of the Charter provides that: “1. Every individual shall be equal before the law; 2. Every individual shall be entitled to equal protection of the law.” 115. In its jurisprudence, the Court has constantly reiterated that the onus is on an Applicant alleging a violation of Article 3 to demonstrate how the Respondent State’s conduct infringed the guarantees of equality and equal protection of the law such as to justify a finding of a violation of the provision.45 116. In the present case, the Applicants have made no effort to demonstrate how the Respondent State violated Article 3 of the Charter but have instead made a general averment. As the Court has constantly restated, general allegations to the effect that a right has been violated are not sufficient to found a violation.46 117. In the circumstances, the Court finds that the Respondent State has not violated Article 3 of the Charter. 45 46 Thomas v. Tanzania (merits), supra, § 140. Cheusi v. Tanzania (judgment), supra, 129. 30