/ ~CHP~'\ _ ··, ~ -~ ACH PR . African Commission on Human and Peoples· Rights Human Rights ou, Collective Responsibility legitimate cause, providing reasons and acting in accordance with the law of the Respondent State. 83. It is clear to the Commission that the Complainants are dissatisfied with the outcomes of the litigation primarily because of their misunderstanding of the law in the respondent State, which ignorance can neither be a defense nor excuse. In the foregoing, the Complainants in their pleadings opine that they should have been indulged a greater deal of lenience because they were selfactors. The Commission considers this to be the very corollary of the allegations raised by the Complainants. One cannot allege that the courts were biased against them because they were not given the special treatment they desired. That would cause the Courts to act with the bias they accuse them of exhibiting. Whilst its generally accepted that Courts should not strictly enforce superfluous technicalities in a way that would fundamentally encumber the access to justice for people representing themselves, the facts presented before the Commission do not fit those circumstances. The Commission is not convinced that the Complainants were the victims of undue treatment by the Courts on account of their status as self-actors. 84. The Complainants have not demonstrated that the a) The High Court's refusal to allow the 1st Complainant to represent the 2nd Complainant in Case Number 31884/2015; (b) the High Court's dismissal of the 2nd Complainant's application for legal aid; (c) the High Court' s joining of the 1st Complainant to the order on costs made against the 2nd Complainant; and (d) the Supreme Court of Appeal's dismissal of the Complainants' application for leave to appeal Case Number 31884/2015 in SCA 354/19, which was again upheld in Constitutional Court case of CCT162/19 were discriminatory decisions not based on the objective evidence, arguments and facts presented before the Courts of the Respondent State. The Complainants were heard by the Courts, they did access justice, to the extent that they complied with the Laws of the land, which in the Commission's opinion would have been applied similarly on other litigants. Consequently, the Commission finds that Article 7 has not been violated. Alleged violation of Articles 2, 3 and 19 85. The Complainants allege that their rights to equality and freedom from ~=~.... discrimination to equality before the law and equal protection of the la as their peoples' rights to equality was violated by a) The High Court 20 I Page #').;"41'"<' Afric;ant4·\ Union'I.Y The African Commission on Human and Peop 31 Bijilo Annex Layout, Kombo N West Coast Regi Phone: (220) 230 4361 Fax: (220)