173. They conclude by maintaining that, “the passive attitude of Burkina Faso in relation to the horrible assassination of which Norbert Zongo, an active journalist, was victim, and the fact that the State had refrained from ensuring, failed and refused to ensure that those responsible were identified and held accountable for their acts, is a source of anguish in exercising the right to freedom of expression in this country and the rights of its citizens to participate effectively in their own governance’. 174. In their reply on the merits of the matter, the Applicants first insist on “the dual nature of freedom of expression which is both the individual right of a person (...) and the right of the public to receive information and ideas...” They went on to stress that the State is accountable for two types of obligations, namely, the obligation to refrain from any interference which may affect the freedom of speech of journalists, and the positive obligation to protect the free flow of information and ideas. 175. In the instant case, the Applicants argue that Late Norbert Zongo had complained on several occasions in his articles, of being threatened and of attempts to abduct him. The Respondent ought to have protected him by carrying out an effective investigation of the acts of violence about which he was complaining. 176. At the Public Hearing of 28 November 2013, the Applicants again underscored the fact that freedom of speech implied that media professionals could work without fear, apprehension or intimidation, thus enabling the public to access information and the truth. The Applicants concluded that the State did not only have to prevent attacks against journalists in the exercise of their duties, but had to strive to quickly find those responsible for such attacks whenever they occur; and that in view of the impunity that those responsible for the assassination of Norbert Zongo had employed, the Respondent State had violated his right as a journalist, owner of a media outlet, and as an advocate of the truth, as well as his right to disseminate information and the truth. 177. In its submission on the merits, the Respondent citing various clauses of the Constitution and the Information Code of Burkina Faso, noted that “no journalist has ever been prevented from exercising his profession since the adoption of the Constitution of 2 4s wv @~ iG ~~ ie om