Merits 45. In his presentation at the 19th Session, the representative of the Complainants expressed his view that an amicable resolution of the alleged violation of Article 13, concerning the annulled elections, was impossible because the government had already indicated that the issue was not negotiable. The representative of the Complainant requested the Commission to clarify the legal situation by indicating if there had been a violation of the Charter. 46. The Government of Nigeria, through its official representative, referred to "irregularities that may not have been detected by the [international] observers." and that "though the elections may have been adjudged free and fair by all.", they were held in "circumstances that the government felt were not propitious." (See statement of Osah, above.) 47. The government stated that "[A]nulling the elections and setting up a government, as was done, to all intents and purposes, was a coup." These statements accord with the Complainant's argument that the question of the election can no longer be the subject of meaningful negotiation. Although the present government contends that there were "irregularities" in the elections, it fails to explain what these were. The government acknowledges that international observers of the elections, applying international standards, judged them to be free and fair. Yet it discounted the judgement of these international observers and substituted its own, unsupported, judgment. 48. A basic premise of international human rights law is that certain standards must be constant across national borders, and governments must be held accountable to these standards. The criteria for what constitutes free and fair elections are internationally agreed upon, and international observers are put in place to apply these criteria. It would be contrary to the logic of international law if a national government with a vested interested in the outcome of an election, were the final arbiter of whether the election took place in accordance with international standards. In the case the government does not even attempt to defend its decision to overrule the judgement of international observers 49. Article 13(1) of the Charter reads: Every citizen shall have the right to participate freely in the government of his country, either directly or through freely chosen representatives in accordance with the provisions of the law. 50. To participate freely in government entails, among other things, the right to vote for the representative of one's choice. An inevitable corollary of this right that the results of free expression of the will of the voters are respected; otherwise, the right to vote freely is meaningless. In light of this, the annulment of the election results, which reflected the free choice of the voters, is in violation of Article 13(1). 51. Article 20(1) of the Charter provides: [All peoples] shall freely determine their political status...according to the policy they have freely chosen. 52. The right of a people to determine their "political status" can be interpreted as involving the right of Nigerians to be able to choose freely those persons or party that will govern them. It is the counterpart of the right enjoyed by individuals under Article 13. 53. The election at issue here, held in conditions adjudged to be free and fair by international observers, was an exercise of the right of Nigerians to freely determine this political status. The subsequent annulment of the results by the authority in power is a violation of this right of the Nigerian people. 54. Article 6 of the African Charter guarantees that: Every individual shall have the right to liberty and to the security of his person. No one may be deprived of his freedom except for reasons and conditions previously laid down by law. In particular, no one may be arbitrarily arrested or detained. 55. The government does not dispute that many people, including human rights activists and journalists, were detained without having charges brought against them and without the possibility of bail. The government maintains that "many" of these individuals have since been released. Where individuals have been detained without charges being brought, particularly since the time of the elections, a period of now over three years, this constitutes an arbitrary deprivation of their liberty and thus violates Article 6. 56. In the words of Article 9 of the African Charter: 1. Every individual shall have the right to receive information. 2. Every individual shall have the right to express and disseminate his opinions within the law . 4