competent to judge non-Muslims, and everyone should have the right to be tried by a secular court if they so wish. 74. It is alleged that non-Muslims were persecuted in order to cause their conversion to Islam. They do not have the right to preach or build their churches; there are restrictions on freedom of expression in the national press. Members of the Christian clergy are harassed; Christians are subjected to arbitrary arrests, expulsions and denial of access to work and food aid. 75. In its various oral and written submissions to the African Commission, the government has not responded in any convincing manner to all the allegations of human rights violations made against it. The Commission reiterates the principle that in such cases where the government does not respect its obligation to provide the Commission with a response on the allegations of which it is notified, it shall consider the facts as probable. 76. Other allegations refer to the oppression of Christian civilians and religious leaders and the expulsion of missionaries. It is alleged that non-Muslims suffer persecution in the form of denial of work, food aid and education. A serious allegation is that of unequal food distribution in prisons, subjecting Christian prisoners to blackmail in order obtain food. These attacks on individuals on account of their religious persuasion considerably restrict their ability to practice freely the religion to which they subscribe. The government provides no evidence or justifications that would mitigate this conclusion. Accordingly, the Commission holds a violation of Article 8. 77. Article 9 of the Charter reads: (2) Every individual shall have the right to express and disseminate his opinions within the law”. 78. The communications under consideration allege that persons were detained for belonging to opposition parties or trade unions. The government confirmed that the “Decree on Process and th Transitional Powers Act 1989”, promulgated on 30 June 1989, stipulates in Section 7 that during a state of emergency, any form of political opposition by any means to the regime of the Revolution for National Salvation is prohibited, where there is “imminent and grave threat to the security of the country, public safety, independence of the State or territorial integrity and economic stability”. 79. As stated above, the Charter contains no derogation clause, which can be seen as an expression of the principle that the restriction of human rights is not a solution to national difficulties: the legitimate exercise of human rights does not pose dangers to a democratic state governed by the rule of law. 80. The Commission has established the principle that where it is necessary to restrict rights, the restriction should be as minimal as possible and should not undermine fundamental rights guaranteed under international law ( ACHPR/101/93:25, Civil Liberties Organisation/Nigeria). Any restrictions on rights should be the exception. The government concerned has imposed a blanket restriction on the freedom of expression. This constitutes a violation of the spirit of Article 9.2. 81. Article 10 of the Charter reads: “Every individual shall have the right to free association provided he abides by the law”. 82. Section 7 of The Process and Transitional Powers Act, 1989 prohibits effecting without special permission, any assembly for a political purpose in a public or private place. This general prohibition on the right to associate in all places is disproportionate to the measures required by the government to maintain public order, security and safety. In addition, there is evidence from the Complainants, which is not contested by the government, that the powers were abused. In the absence of information from the government the Commission must give weight to the facts submitted by the Complainant. Accordingly, the Commission holds a violation of Article 10.1. 83. The Commission is cognisant of the fact that it has found many violations of the Charter on the part of the Government. In concrete terms, this shows that the citizens of Sudan have endured a lot of suffering. To change so many laws, policies and practices will of course not be a simple matter. However, the Commission must emphasise that the people of Sudan deserve no less. The government is bound by its international obligations and the Commission's findings are specific enough to permit their implementation. This decision does not constitute the Commission’s viewpoint on the overall human rights situation in Sudan. It is based on the allegations of violations committed by Sudan after its ratification of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights and on verifications carried out in this regard, while not failing to note that the situation has improved significantly.