2.4 - As this Court, will very easily note, upon receipt of a petition requesting the removal from office of a Justice of the Superior Court of the Republic of Ghana, the President is required to refer the petition to the Chief Justice of the Republic of Ghana. 2.8 - Having received the petition sent to His Excellency the President of the Republic of Ghana by Anas Aremeyaw Anas, the Chief Justice, in fulfilment of her mandate under Article 146(3) of the 1992 Constitution of the Republic of Ghana, studied the petitions, together with the evidence upon which the petitions were based, and found a prima facie case, established against the Applicants and other Justices of the High Court. The evidence upon which the petition was based consisted mainly of audio visual recordings and are attached hereto and marked as EXH “AG2”. 2.12 - Be that as it may, the Chief Justice requested Applicants in her letter of the 9th September 2015 to respond to the allegations contained in the petition by Monday, 14th September, 2015. This request was made by the Lady Chief Justice to enable her determine whether or not a prima facie case had been established against Applicants after taking into account, the contents of the audio visual recordings which contained the evidence upon which the petition against them was made. 2.14 - Without responding to the Lady Chief Justice’s letter, 1stApplicant caused a Writ to be issued in the Supreme Court against Tiger Eye PI and the Chief Justice as well as the Attorney-General in Writ numbered J1/29/2015. Copies of this Writ are attached to the Application as Exh. “DLA 11”. 88. For an action of discrimination to succeed under the articles listed above, there must be established a difference of treatment in an identical or similar case. In BADINI SALFO V THE REPUBLIC OF BURKINA FASO JUD NO: ECW/CCJ/JUD/13/12, the Court while relying in its judgment in CNDD v. COTE D’ IVOIRE (2009) Para 55, and PROF. ETIM MOSES v. REP OF GAMBIA, (2007) Para 31, held that: “Equality before the law presupposes that equal treatment is accorded people finding themselves in similar situations. Thus, examining the allegation of the violation of the principle of equality requires that, at least 32