i s'003[ 3 Allegation relating to the Applicants being rendered stateless 100. The Applicants allege that, following the revocation of their passports, they have been rendered stateless 101. The Respondent State has not responded to this allegation 102. ln the instant case, the Court has determined that the Applicants have not been deprived of their nationality. They are still Rwandan nationals. The Court therefore finds that the Applicants' claim that they have been rendered stateless is moot and it is consequently dismissed. lt. Allegation relating to violation of the right to freedom of movement 103. The Applicants allege that the revocation of their passports has violated their right to freedom of movement 104. The Respondent State has not responded to this allegation 1 05. Article 12(2) of the Charter provides that "Every individual shall have the right to leave any country including his own, and to return to his country. This right may only be subject to restrictions, provided for by law for the protection of national security, law and order, public health or morality". 106. This Court in Anudo Ochieng Anudo v Tanzania cited the views of the United Nations Human Rights committee that "...there are few, if any, circumstances in which deprivation of the right to enter one's own country could be reasonable. A State Party must not, by stripping a person of nationality or by expelling an individual 24