34. Such proof has, however, not been forthcoming from the Respondent State. That is what the Court ought to have expressed in a clearer manner particularly with regard to the right to freely participate in the government of the country. Paragraphs I 09 in ji.ne, lll, 1 J 3 and 114 of the Judgment indeed suggest that the barring of independent candidates from certain elections and the correlative obligation to belong to a political party are in "themselves" violations of Articles I 0 and 13 (l) of the Charter, whether or not such limitations are reasonable. The reasoning of the Court would had been clearer if its various sequences and the conesponding paragraphs of the Judgment were positioned in a more coherent manner so to show that it is the fact that the limitation to the rights concerned were unreasonable that led the Court to the conclusion that the said right.:; had been violated. Paragraph 109, in pa1iicular, is not at its right place in the reasoning of the Court (it should be located upstream) and Paragraph I 08, for part, addresses issues which are extraneous to the instant case.