Also, in Saadi v. the United Kingdom Application No. 13229/03 Judgment 2008 the ECHR held that, detention would not be arbitrary if it meets four conditions: (1) carried out in good faith; (2) closely connected to the purpose of preventing unauthorized entry to the country; (3) the place and conditions of detention were appropriate bearing in mind that the detainee was an asylum seeker rather than a suspected criminal; (4) the length of the detention did not exceed that reasonably required for the purpose pursued. In the present case, the Defendant contends that by virtue of Article 82 (3) of its code of penal procedure, the identity of every person entering into its territory must be controlled, with the view to prevent breach of public peace, especially the security of persons and goods. The Defendant however admitted that it retained the Plaintiff in compliance with procedural formalities. This assertion is unclear as to rebut the Plaintiff’s claims. The Defendant has not led sufficient evidence to disprove the Plaintiff’s allegations. Neither have they shown that at the time the Plaintiff was stopped at the border for routine check, they suspected him of any criminal activity that warranted his detention at the border. The Plaintiff on the other hand did not prove that the said detention was arbitrary. The onus now lies on the plaintiff to prove that the duration and manner which it was carried out was arbitrary. 16