hectares of land has not been registered or where property or land rights are vital for the survival of majority of the population in West Africa, people looking for land whose identity documents have been rejected may not know whether they have a right to it. Furthermore, persons without any document but who already possessed land may reasonably suppose that they are Ivorian whereas the government refuses to confirm such a claim. Consequently, following attempts made to obtain an official title deed of the property pursuant to the 1998 Law, the persons without any documents may be denied ownership of their land under the pretext that they are foreigners. 74. Finally, the Complainant alleges that by denying the victims the possibility of an employment prospect and a personal and family development, the Respondent State violated Articles guaranteed under Articles 15, 18 and 22 of the Charter. Touching on article 15, the Complainant states that the difficulties faced by the Dioulas in the process of recognition of their Ivorian nationality infringe on their right to obtain employment on a nondiscriminatory basis. Without a nationality certificate, they are excluded from access to employment in the formal sector. For instance, the witness « Abdou » was denied promotion as a judge because his mother’s birth in the 1930’s in Bouaké had been registered under a different name. The interested party had all the same produced nationality documents that were in order. 75. On the allegation of violation of Article 18, the Complainant declares the destruction of the unity of the family following the violent struggle for access to nationality and identity cards. For example, after the police had seized the documents of the witness by name « Drissa », the latter had to travel out of his region with a laissez-passer which was only valid for one month. The Complainant alleges that such a situation puts restrictions on the freedom of movement, causes insecurity and a general state of vulnerability and that in its jurisprudence, the Commission established that the denial of nationality is a threat to family life. 76. Concerning the violation of the right of peoples to development protected by Article 22, the Complainant alleges that arbitrary denial of nationality prevented the Dioulas from achieving their ambitions and their full human potential. The Complainant asserts that the capacity of the people to achieve their nationality rights provides an indispensable element to stability both at the personal level and at the social and international levels. He avers that this condition of a dignified life is essential for the full and harmonious development of the human personality. According to the Complainant, the realisation of the « plan for life » is the attainment of the right to personal development. To buttress this argument, the Complainant quotes the testimony of « Abdou » whose life has come to a standstill after being 20