246. Citing the Court’s decision in Beneficiaries of the late Norbert Zongo v. Burkina Faso, the Applicants submit that the failure of a State to act with due diligence in “seeking out, prosecuting and placing on trial” those responsible for human rights violations amounts to a violation of Article 7 of the Charter. 247. According to the Applicants, the Respondent State has violated the PWA’ right to an effective remedy, as guaranteed by Article 7 of the Charter due to the alleged inadequacy of judicial response, including the limited number of successful prosecutions and convictions related to attacks on PWA, as well as the lack of adequate compensation and support for victims. 248. The Respondent State contends that it has taken certain measures to guarantee the rights of PWA which include: Legislative, judicial and administrative measures. In this regard, the Respondent State argues that it enacted laws to protect PWA such as Constitution, Persons with Disabilities Act and the Legal Aid Act 2017. 249. As for the judicial measures, they include setting up of mobile courts and amending the interpretation act to remove language barriers for PWA. According to the Respondent State, administrative measures it has undertaken include, setting up a reporting system where information regarding attacks of PWA and the perpetrators of such attacks are communicated to the relevant authorities. *** 250. Article 7 of the Charter reads as follows: 1. Every individual shall have the right to have his cause heard. This comprises: a. the right to an appeal to competent national organs against acts of violating his fundamental rights as recognized and 57