Alleged violation of Article 5 78. The Complainants state that the treatment received by the Victims on 25 May 2005 amounted to a violation of their dignity and to inhuman and degrading treatment and that the assaults were severe and gravely humiliating in violation of Article 5 of the African Charter. They cite the case of Purohit and Moore v. The Gambia ,14 where the African 79. AC HP R Commission ascertained the test for violation of human dignity. They also refer to a Canadian Supreme Court (CSC) judgement in R v. Ewanchuk,15 where a link was made between the right to dignity and the right to equality. The CSC established that violence against women is as much a matter of equality as it is an offence against human dignity and a violation of human rights. The CSC further stated that, sexual assault is an assault upon human dignity and constitutes a denial of any concept of equality for women.16 80. The Complainants argue that the test for defining inhuman and degrading treatment in international, regional and national human rights instruments is whether the treatment complained of is very severe. They aver that inhuman and degrading treatment, as extensively elaborated by the European Court, involves treatment resulting in physical or psychological injuries. They submit that, degrading treatment more specifically is a treatment that grossly humiliates a person, and that, 14 Communication 241/01- Purohit and Moore v. The Gambia (2003) ACHPR. 15 R v Ewanchuk [1999] 1 S.C.R. 330. 16 Ibid. 20