Article 2 of the Charter is imperative for the respect and enjoyment of all other rights and freedoms protected in the Charter. The provision strictly proscribes any distinction, exclusion or preference made on the basis of race, colour, sex, religion, political opinion, national extraction or social origin, which has the effect of nullifying or impairing equality of opportunity or treatment. … The scope of the right to non-discrimination extends beyond the right to equal treatment by the law and also has practical dimension in that individuals should in fact be able to enjoy the rights enshrined in the Charter without distinction of any kind relating to their race, colour, sex, religion, political opinion, national extraction or social origin, or any other status. 110. In so far as proving a violation of Articles 2 of the Charter is concerned, the Court observes that in George Maili Kemboge v. United Republic of Tanzania, that “[g]eneral statements to the effect that [a] right has been violated are not enough. More substantiation is required.”43 Any alleged violation of Articles 2 of the Charter, therefore, must be backed by adequate evidence to substantiate the allegation.44 111. In the present Application, the Court finds that the Applicants make a general averment without offering any proof to substantiate their allegations. Resultantly, the Court dismisses their allegations of a violation of the right to non-discrimination protected under Article 2 of the Charter. E. Alleged violation of the right to equality and equal protection of the law 112. In the their Reply to the Respondent State’s Response, the Applicants pray that the Court find that the Respondent State “did violate the Applicants’ rights provided under Article 3 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights.” Apart from this general allegation, however, the Applicants offer no 43 44 (merits) (11 May 2018) 2 AfCLR 369, § 51. Minani Evarist v. United Republic of Tanzania (merits) (21 September 2018) 1 AfCLR 402, § 75. 29