55. The Complainant relies on evidence obtained from hundreds of victims in 2010 from which it emerges that more than 54 percent of the persons interviewed claimed that the authenticity of their identity documents was called into question as a result of their foreign consonance of their names. Thus, for instance, a person interviewed by name « Diallo » was told that such a surname could not be Ivorian. In other cases, persons who had shown proof of their nationality were all the same subjected to harassments because their names did not sound like Ivorian names, as shown by a witness interviewed by name « Mamadi ». Some were compelled to pay monies to regain their freedom following identity checks whereas they had shown proof of their nationality. Their documents were subsequently seized by police officers or the gendarmerie. In the same vein, persons travelling with their colleagues were compelled to pay fines to police officers whilst no fine was taken from the other non-Dioula passengers. 56. Concerning the nature of the difficulties faced by applicants for nationality documentation, as part of this Communication, the Complainant lays emphasis on evidence provided by more than 53 percent of persons who claimed to have encountered administrative problems while 39 percent reported about justice-related issues. For instance, the renewal of documents on nationality was denied someone by name « Savadogo » because the difference between his mother’s age and his age was too wide and suspicious. The authorities remained adamant while the applicant produced his birth certificate, his old certificate of nationality, the identity card of his uncle, his mother’s birth certificate and the naturalization decree of his grandfather. All these persons interviewed were victims of acts reported above and they had one thing in common, that is, they bore surnames such as « Zongo », « Dabré » or « Yabré », which are considered as non-Ivorian. 57. To illustrate the alleged discrimination in a more representative way and in the application of the law, the Complainant refers to the consideration of the candidatures for the 2000 presidential election in Côte d’Ivoire. Based on the law on nationality, reinforced by the new provisions of Article 35 of the 2000 Ivorian Constitution, the candidature of Mr. Alassane Ouattara was rejected for failing to meet the « Ivorian origin » criterion whereas he had produced his Ivorian birth certificate and those of his father and mother. In addition to this, he produced his Ivorian identity card and copies of his two parents’ cards. In spite of all these documents, the Supreme Court used its full discretion provided by the law on nationality to nullify the candidature of Mr. Ouattara. 58. By contrast, the Complainant makes reference to the treatment meted out by the same Court to Mr. Robert Guéi as a candidate. As proof of his nationality, 14