Ii"}).J ACHPR ~~ (JllI.H·, African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights Human Rights our Collective Responsibility 252. The Commission, concerning the limitation of Article 9, considers its Resolution on the Adoption of the Declaration of Principles on Freedom of Expression in Africa (2002)208 and holds that any restrictions on freedom of expression shall be provided by law, serve a legitimate interest and be necessary for a democratic society. 253. Associating these principles with the facts, the Complainants submitted that the Victims were merely participating in a political demonstration/ sit-in at Tahrir Square, not a full month after mass demonstrations led to the removal of Egypt's long-time ruling president Hosni Mubarak. The demonstration the Complainants took part in called for specific political objectives, such as creating a new post-revolution constitution and the removal of Prime Minister Ahmed Shafik, who was appointed to his post by Mubarak, only to be destructed on 9 March 2011, by the Egyptian military tanks and soldiers, together with individuals dressed in civilian clothes, who marched onto Tahrir Square, burned tents belonging to individuals who participated in the sit-in and arrested 18 female protesters, victims inclusive.P? 254. In the end, the Crux of the matter is whether the activities in which the Complainants expressed their political opinions fell within the recognised scope of limitation of the freedom of expression, assembly and freedom of opinion. The Commission finds it negative. It hence remains guided by its decision in Kevin Mgwanga Gunme et al vs Cameroono» that invocation of restrictions to the rights enshrined in Articles 9 (2) and 11 does not absolve the State from its duty to guarantee these rights. Preventing individuals from peacefully expressing their (political) opinion in public and from participating in peaceful protest through arrests, detention, and abuse, as in the present case, cannot be justified, as such disproportionate conduct amounts to a blanket restriction and hence a violation of the freedoms guaranteed in Articles 9 and 11. 255. The Commission holds that the arrest, detention, and subsequent ill-treatment and torture of the Victims were in response to the Complainants' exercise of their freedom of expression and assembly. As is evident from the context of the violations that took place, the nature of the questions put to the Victims and the accusations levelled against 208 African Commission, Resolution on the Adoption of the Declaration of Principles on Freedom of Expression in Africa (2002)" Res.62(XXXII)02, at http://www.achpr.org/files/sessions/32nd/ resolu tions / 621ach (Last accessed on 14u, April 2023) 209 See, Paragraph 215 210 Communication 266/03, para.137 591 p,h " g c African' Union htlps:/achpr.au.intiO 0 D