001071 two (2) years in prison, that is, from 2010 to 2012 and his continued detention to this date, are illegal and in violation of his right to freedom of movement. 116. The Applicant further submits that the Respondent State has the primary responsibility to respect, protect and promote his right to freedom of movement; and having failed to do so, the Respondent State violated this right by unlawfully arresting and detaining him on his entry into the country. 117. The Respondent State, for its part, contends that the Applicant filed an application for residence at the Regional Immigration Bureau in Kagera using a British passport. While treating this application, the immigration officers discovered that he was also in possession of a South African passport and had no legal document justifying his presence in the territory of Tanzania. 118. According to the Respondent State, subsequent investigations led to his arrest and detention. He was sentenced by the Court for illegal entry and presence in its territory and his detention came about only after he was arrested, charged and convicted in accordance with the laws governing criminal proceedings in the Respondent State. 119. The Respondent immigration officers, State further submits that just as was the case the Applicant failed to tender any document before to show the that he entered the country lawfully. Since he did not have any class of residence permit and is not a citizen of the Respondent State, his presence in Tanzania was unlawful. 120. Consequently, the Respondent State contends that it did not violate the Applicant’s right to freedom of movement. RE 121. The Court notes that Article 12 of the Charter stipulates the right to freedom of movement as follows: - / ey / 7) 4) — } Shy < Ao = \\ } ae / / / / x = \ ak \f \ ee & Qd —~ p of aa N\e } ; 7 ee i 2