52. The principle of the right to non-discrimination under the Charter is one of the general principles of the Charter. The right to non-discrimination is a substantive right by itself but it is also used in the interpretation and implementation of all the provisions of the Charter. Article 3 states that: Every child shall be entitled to the enjoyment of the rights and freedoms recognized and guaranteed in this Charter irrespective of the child’s or his/her parents’ or legal guardians’ race, ethnic group, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national and social origin, fortune, birth or other status. 53. The reading of the right to non-discrimination under article 3 of the Charter has three complementary elements which are differential treatment, interference, and rights and freedoms withing the Charter. These three elements are essential aspects of the right to non-discrimination, not only under the Charter but also the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and international law.60 From the onset, the Committee notes that the right to non-discrimination is an absolute right as the wordings of the provision do not include a ’balancing test’ which gives room for States to justify an act which amounts to differential treatment on the prohibited grounds and which impair the enjoyment of the rights under human rights laws.61 Even though the right to nondiscrimination is an absolute right, States may claim the necessity of defence to justify differential treatment.62 However, any differential treatment can only be justified if it is reasonable and objective and aims to achieve a purpose which is legitimate under the Charter.63 Accordingly, complainants who allege a violation of the right to nondiscrimination are required to prove the differential treatment on the prohibited grounds in the enjoyment of any right, and it is up to the Respondent State to provide a justification or an explanation on how the differential treatment advances the rights contained in the Charter.64 Other international human rights monitoring bodies like the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights state that “Both direct and indirect forms of differential treatment can amount to discrimination under article 2, paragraph 2, of the Covenant,65 unless the justification for differentiation is reasonable and objective.66 54. In the present Communication, there is no contestation as to the existence of differential treatment based on the pregnancy and marital status of girls in education. It is also clear that the differential treatment has resulted in the infringement of the right to education and other rights. However, the Respondent State submits that the differential treatment of pregnant and married girls serves a legitimate objective. A differential treatment amounts to discrimination if it does not have an objective or reasonable justification and there is no proportionality between the aim sought and 60 Bruce Abramson, ‘A Commentary on the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child: Article 2 The Right to Non-Discrimination,’ Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2008, page 29; HRC, General Comment no. 18 on non-discrimination, 1989, para 7. 61 As above (Abramson), 40. 62 As above, 45. 63 HRC, General Comment no. 18 on non-discrimination, para 13. See also 64 ACERWC, Communication No 002/Com/002/2009, IHRDA and OSI v the Republic of Kenya, para 56. 65 Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, General Comment No. 20, Non-discrimination in Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, UN Doc. E/C.12/GC/20 (2009), para. 10. 66 As above, para 13 JN 23