to as “PI status”) on his passport and that he be allowed to enter the Respondent State so as to recover his personal assets. 7. On 15 October 2004, the Ministry of Investment and Planning of the Revolutionary Government of Zanzibar informed the Applicant that his PI status would not be waived but rather he should appoint an advocate who would go to Zanzibar and ascertain his property and dispose of them , if necessary. 8. Unable to return to the Respondent State, the Applicant filed a case in 2009, before the Southern Africa Development Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as “SADC Tribunal”) to challenge the deportation order and further alleged that he had been tortured and ill-treated during his detention in Tanzania. In the matter before the SADC Tribunal, the Respondent State raised three preliminary objections, including the Applicant’s failure to exhaust local remedies. On 11 June 2010, the SADC Tribunal dismissed the Applicant’s case for failure to exhaust local remedies. 9. The Applicant claims that he did not receive any more correspondence from the Respondent State until 2017, when he sent a request to the Respondent State's consulate in the Republic of Mauritius and the Republic of Mauritius' Consul in Tanzania. In this request, he requested the Ministry of Home Affairs to remove the PI status on his passport. 10. The Applicant further alleges that, at the time of filing the present Application, 17 years had lapsed while his rights are continually being denied. B. Alleged violations 11. The Applicant alleges violation of his following rights: i. Right to non-discrimination, protected under Article 2 of the Charter; 4