E. Mr. Ngoge Contends that the Respondent State violated his rights contrary to Articles 3, 5, 8, 15, 19, 22 and 24 of the Charter in that he was barred from practicing law and his law firm wound up, which he alleges to be a reprisal for exposing wrongdoings in the election of Mr. Francis Kaparo as Speaker of Parliament. He alleges that he was also arrested as punishment for the same. F. Finally, the Complainant contends his rights to liberty and socio-economic rights have been violated in that he is in fear of being under surveillance and forcibly disappeared by the Security agents of the Respondent State. He also alleges that he is being deprived of public service work and presidential appointments as a reprisal for the exposure of wrongdoings in the election of Mr. Francis Kaparo as Speaker of Parliament. 64. The Respondent State did not submit its ',observation~ .on the merits of this communication, accordingly, the Commission wi1Li_n thi_s r~gard adopt a default decision utilising the information before it. THE COMMISSION'S FINDINGS ON THE ALtEGATIONS The matter of the election of the Speaker of Parliament.on the 9th oflanuaryt2003 65. The Complaint submits in the main that his application is primarily based on the interpretation of the then Constitutionofthe Respondent State. I . / 66. The analysis on these issues will be }im.i ted to whether the alleged acts or omissions of the Respondent State breach the provisions of the Charter. The Complainant alleged that it was mandatory and urgent under Sections 31,33, 37, 58(3) and 82 of the Kenyan Constitution for the then President, H.E Mwayi Kibaki to gazette the nominated MPs immediately after the General Election of 2002 and prior to calling for the sitt1ng of the parliament. As a consequence, he submits that the session of Parliament that the-' President convened, and the election of the Speaker in the absence of the·nominated MPs was ab initio a nullity for want of constitutionality. new. 67. The Commission _not~s that despite the Complainant's charge against the proceedings of the 9th of January 2003, he as a matter of fact participated in those elections which he now disputes. 6 According to the Parliamentary Hansard of the contested Parliamentary Proceedings, the Complainant earned 2 votes in the election that was won by Mr. Francis Kaparo.7 It is clear from this record that Mr. Ngoge did not in fact have any issues with contesting at the election but seems to have realised its alleged illegality after he had been unsuccessful in his bid. This is