113. Furthermore, according to the the Respondent State, the disparities make it evidently clear that the decision reached by the PPO, after its detailed and scrupulous investigations which showed that there were no grounds for initiating criminal proceedings "temporarily" due to the inability to identify the perpetrators was logical and sound. More so, the perpetrators could not be identified and all those accused by the Complainants, including the police and the others, were not present at the scene of the AC HP R incident at the material time. The African Commission’s Analysis on the Merits 114. In this Communication, the African Commission is called upon to determine whether the Respondent‟s State failure to protect the Victims from the alleged acts or omissions is a violation of their rights under the African Charter; specifically Articles 1, 2, 3, 5, 7(1) (a), 9(2), 16, 18(3) and 26. 115. Articles 2 and 18(3) will be considered together, given that both have an element of discrimination. 116. Article 1 of the African Charter will be dealt with after all the other Articles have been analyzed, since a violation of Article 1 can only be established if other Articles in the Charter have been violated. Alleged violation of Article 2-Right against non-discrimination, and Article 18(3)-Right of Non-discrimination Against Women 117. Article 2 of the African Charter provides that: “Every individual shall be entitled to the enjoyment of the rights and freedoms recognised and guaranteed in the present Charter without distinction of any kind such as 33