0005CI3 the Court of Appeal Court are governed by the Appellate Jurisdiction Act of 2002 and the Court of Appeal Rules. 72. The of Appeal considered all the of appeal. The Respondent State also states that the Respondent State avers that the Court Applicant's grounds Applicant's appeals were heard and determined by the appellate courts and he was duly accorded his right to equality before the law as guaranteed under the Charter. 73. Article 3 of the Charter stipulates that "(1) Every individual shall be equat before the law" and that "(2) Every individual shall be entitled to equal protection of the law." 74. With respect to the right to equality before the law, this Court has found, in paragraphs 66 and 67 above that, the Court of Appeal's assessment of the evidence relating to the doctrine of recent possession was not done in a manner that infringed on the Applicant's rights. The Court also finds that the Court of Appeal's assessment was neither manifestly erroneous, nor did it occasion a miscarriage of justice to the Applicant. Furthermore, the Court has found no evidence on record and the Applicant has not demonstrated how he was treated differently, as compared to other persons who were in a sltuation similar to his,1a resulting in unequal protection of the law or inequality before the law contrary to Article 3 of the Charter. 75. The Court therefore dismisses this allegation and holds that the Respondent State has not violated Article 3 of the Charter. C. Alleged violation of the right not to be discriminated against 76. The Applicant claims that the treatment of his matters by the court of Appeal violated his rights under Article 2 of the Charter. 14 Application No. 006/2016. Judgment of 07112120'18 (Merits), Mgosi futwita Makungu v tJnited Republic of Tanzanra. g 66. 20 I