605049 entire Bench. Furthermore, the Applicant has not illustrated how the judge’s remarks at the Ordinary Bench later influenced the decision of the Review Bench. 132. The Court therefore concludes that the Respondent State has not violated the Applicant's right to be heard by an impartial tribunal guaranteed under Article 7 (1) (d) of the Charter. B. The alleged violation of the right to non-discrimination and the right to equality before the law and equal protection of the law 133. The Applicant argues that his right to non-discrimination and right to equality were violated as a result of Justice Dotse’s remarks and by the Supreme Court truncating the proceedings. 134. The Respondent State contends that the Applicant has not demonstrated how he has been discriminated against based on race, ethnic, group, colour, sex, language, religion, political or any other opinion, national and social origin, fortune, birth or any status. Furthermore, it avers that the Applicant has not demonstrated how he was not accorded equal protection of the law. kkk 135. Article 2 of the Charter states that “Every individual shall be entitled to the enjoyment of rights and freedoms recognized and guaranteed in the present Charter without distinction of any kind such as race, ethnic group, colour, sex, language, religion, political or any other opinion, national and social origin, fortune, birth or any status.” 136. Article 3 of the Charter guarantees the right to equality and equal protection of the law in the following terms: