5. Violation of freedom from discrimination contrary to Articles 2 of the ACHPR and 7 of the UDHR. 6. Violation of the duty and obligation of the Respondent to protect the Applicant’ human rights contrary to Articles 2 of the ICESCR and Article 1 of the ACHPR. From the summary of the rights above, it is clear that the case of the Applicant is that the denial or refusal to pay his pension and other entitlements is a violation of his rights to life, right to health, right to human dignity, right to Property and freedom from discrimination. The Court will now examine each of these articles to determine whether the Applicant’s rights have been violated as claimed. 53. Violation of the right to health, dignity and life. The crux of provision of Article 25(1) UDHR is the guarantee of a standard of living adequate for the Health and well-being. The rights to life, health and dignity are intertwined such that a violation of one can lead to the violation of the other. It follows that the enjoyment of a healthy life is dependent on the ability to afford good medical services which in turn is dependent on the financial security sufficient for maintenance of good health. Payment of pension implicates the ability of pensioners to enjoy these guarantees. . The allegation of the violation of the right to life does not necessarily entail the actual loss of life or merely physical act of breathing, neither does it connote mere animal existence or continued drudgery through life. It has a wider meaning which includes right to live with human dignity, right to livelihood, right to health and many more. Consequently, the refusal to pay retirement benefits can occasion the violation of the right to health and thus a violation of the right to life. Of course the dignity of a person is implicated if due to lack of means traceable to denial of pension, the person becomes a relic of the society falling from his/her ordinary standard in life with the likelihood of becoming a beggar. 54.The Court further notes that the combined interpretation of Articles 22 and 25 of the UDHR with Articles 9 and 11 of ICESCR situates pension as a social security which obliges the State Parties to comply with their obligations under articles 1 ACHPR and 2 of the ICESCR. The obligation of State Parties to provide social security including pension as envisaged in Article 25 of the UDHR has been well articulated as follows by a legal expert; Z. Vorslava in his book titled: Legal Aspects of Right for a Pension as a Human Rights; 21