om,fi? arbitrary? (ii) if the answer to the first issue is in the affirmative, is the revocation of their passports tantamount to revocation of their nationality? i. Was the revocation of the Applicants' passports arbitrary? 82.The Court notes that the factors to be considered in determining whether the revocation of the Applicants' passports was arbitrary or not, are the same as those that apply with regard to the deprivation of nationality. Therefore, such revocation must (i) be founded on a clear legal basis (ii) serve a legitimate purpose that conforms with international law (iii) be proportionate to the interest protected (iv) respect prescribed proceduralguarantees, allowing the concerned to challenge the decision before an independent body.20 83.The Court notes thatArticle 34 of the 2011 Rwandan lmmigration and Emigration Law provides that "A travel document is the property of the state. lt may be withdrawn from the holder in case it is evident that he/she uses it or may use it in an inappropriate manned'. 21 34.Ordinarily, since the Applicants allege that their passports have been revoked arbitrarily, they are required to prove their claim. However, considering that, it is the Respondent state's agencies which have the access to records and monopoly of regulating the issuance and revocation of passports, the Respondent State is in a position of advantage over the Applicants since its agencies have all relevant information relating to process of issuance or revocation of passports.22 lt would therefore be unjust to place the burden of proof on the Applicants considering that, all relevant documentation in this regard is in the Respondent state,s custody. 20 Application No. 012/2015. Judgment ot 22103t2018 (Merits) Anudo Ochieng Anudo v United Repubtic of Tanzania (Anudo Anudo v Tanzania Merits) g 79. 2'Article 34 Law No. 04i201 1 oI21losl2o11 on lmmigration and Emigration in Rwanda. zz Anudo Anudo v Tanzania (Merits) S 74 and 77 . 20 @_