Applicants have not demonstrated the alleged inadequacy of judicial response by the Respondent State. 255. In the circumstances, the Court finds that the Respondent State has not violated the right of an effective remedy under Article 1 as read jointly with Article 7 of the Charter. F. Alleged violations of the rights and welfare of the child 256. The Applicants allege the following violations of the rights and welfare of the child: i. Right not to be subjected to abduction, sale and trafficking of children; ii. Right related to the best interests of the child; and iii. Right to education. 257. The alleged violations will be considered successively. i. Alleged violation of the right not to be subjected to abduction, sale and trafficking of children 258. Citing the decision of the African Committee on the Rights and Welfare of the Child (hereinafter referred to as “Children’s Committee”) in Centre for Human Rights and Another v. Senegal, the Applicants aver that the definition of child trafficking is “the recruitment of victims, their transportation, transfer and harbouring of children for the purpose of exploitation.” 259. According to the Applicants, children are the majority of the targets for trafficking, given the thriving market for body parts of PWA combined with the fact that children are vulnerable and “easy to find and capture”. The Applicants further argue that the Respondent State has not safeguarded the rights of children with albinism within its territory. 59