240. The Applicant accuses the Benin Head of State of presenting him, both to the public and to the media, as guilty even when he has been acquitted. According to him, the statements of the Head of State are intended to publicly tarnish his reputation by denying his innocence. 241. The Applicant further alleges that in April 2017, the Head of State in answer to the questions put by journalists came back on the attack in the programme "African debates" on RFI and France 24, declaring that: "the guy is in a mess. He got himself caught up in a drug trafficking case and the only defence he found is to accuse me. I had kept quiet in his own interest so as not to aggravate his situation because, as you said, he was an ally." 242. He considers that the Judgment of 4 November 2016 against him is in fact an "acquittal-guilty" judgment which inexorably taints his reputation by making the people of Benin to take him for a real international drug trafficker. * 243. The Respondent State contends that the Applicant's detention was more than respectful of his rights. It affirms that on 28 October 2016, the Applicant was arrested in his capacity as the Chief Executive Officer of the company COMON SA, recipient of the container in which the cocaine was found . It also affirms that at the time of his arrest , the Applicant refused to board the pickup truck of the Maritime Gendarmerie Company officers who did not object to his preference to take his own car. 244. The Respondent State refutes the Applicant's allegations that the proceedings were aimed at tarnishing his reputation and that the judgment of acquittal in no way detracts from the Applicant's reputation . It considers the allegations unfounded and without substance. 245. The Respondent State further submits that the Applicant is ill-founded when he alleges that the Head of State "spoke of his guilt in the drug trafficking case, whereas he had been acquitted", because in its view, the Benin Head of State, concerned I a~W'