documentary proof that the victim is a minor (birth certificate); (ii) the fact that the absence of parental consent has not been established; and (iii) the fact that the court did not determine the case on the merits after evaluation of all the evidence on record. 50. The Court notes that, according to the records, the Court of Appeal declared itself as lacking the jurisdiction to hear allegations which had not been raised before, nor settled by, the first appellate court.s lt held, however, that the victim was sixteen (16) years old at the time of the crime and upheld the Applicant's conviction. 51.The Court notes that the Applicant has not demonstrated how the Court of Appeal's refusal to consider two of his three allegations violated his right to equal protection before the law. This Court has, in the past, held that "General statements to the effect that [a] right has been violated are not enough. Jt/ore substantiation is required."6 52. Moreover, the documents in file demonstrate that the Court of Appeal justified the dismissal of the Applicant's two arguments on the grounds that they relate to issues that were not previously raised before the lower courts. ln this regard, this Court has not found that the Applicant was treated unfairly or subjected to discriminatory treatment in the course of the domestic proceedingsT. 53.ln view of the forgoing, the Court dismisses the Applicant's allegation that his rights under Article 3(1) of the Charter have been violated. "ln the event and on the basis of the settled legal position demonstrated by the Court, grounds 2 and 3 having been raised for the first time in a second appeal are not legally before us for determination and therefore lack merit." 6 AIex Thomas v Tanzania Judgment, op. cit., para. 140. See also: Kennedy Owino Onyachi and Charles John Mwanini Njoka v Tanzania Judgment, op. cit., paras. 1S0 - 153. 7 Application No. 032/2015. Judgment2110312018 2018, Kliji lsiaga v. tJnited Repubtic of Tanzania, 5 para. 85. & r 72 A-k 4