vicinity of the Renaissance Monument, courts and tribunals, the Senate, in front of hospitals and other designated areas of Dakar the Respondent’s capital. 70. The Applicants assert in their submission that freedom of expression includes freedom to disseminate one’s opinion regardless of the means of expression. That carrying out a demonstration is a means of such expression which is protected by law because it is a means of expressing one’s opinions. 71. They state that they do not have the possibility of fully expressing their opinions because of the prohibition imposed by the Ministerial Order of 20 July 2011. 72. On its part the Respondent contend that the freedom of expression is not absolute as it is restricted in accordance with the law, “a) for respect of the rights or reputations of others; b) For the protection of national security or of public order, or of public health or morals.” That the restrictions were made in the interest of national security, public safety, public order, health and freedoms of others. 73. They further argue that for the Applicants to succeed in their claim, they must prove their interests as victims by demonstrating that they have suffered a violation of the alleged human rights or to establish their status enabling them to bring an action on behalf of the victims. That the Applicants who allege to be victims have not demonstrated how their rights were violated or the injury they have suffered as a result of the restrictions of the Order. 23