126. The Respondent State did not respond to this allegation but it asserts in general that its Constitution guarantees full equality before the law, equal protection of the law and the right to a fair trial in accordance with Article 13(1)(6) thereof. toe 127. 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”. 128. In its jurisprudence, the Court has established that the onus is on the Applicant to demonstrate how the guarantees of equality before the law and equal protection of the law have resulted in a violation of Article 3 of the Charter,® 129. In the instant case, the Court notes that the Applicant has failed to show how he was treated differently from other litigants in the same situation as he was. In this regard, the Court reiterates its position that “General statements to the effect that his right has been violated are not enough. More concrete evidence is required”, 130. Accordingly, the Court holds that the Respondent State has not violated Article 3(1) and (2) of the Charter. C. Alleged violation of the right not to be subjected to cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment 131. The Applicant alleges that the Respondent State has violated his right not to be subjected to cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, because he was beaten up by agents of the Respondent State when he was first arrested and that he was intimidated and tortured at the police station during the investigations in 88Alex Thomas v. United Republic of Tanzania Tanzania (merits and reparations) §157. (merits), § 140; Armand 36 Guehi v. United Republic of