Issues for determination 1. Whether the Court has competence to hear the application. 2. Whether the Applicants are victims. 3. Whether the Applicants established the claim of unlawful killing against the Respondent. 4. Whether the Respondent investigated the allegation of murder contained in the complaint forwarded to it. 5. Whether the Applicants can bring a claim for compensation in the circumstances. ISSUE 1: Whether the Court has competence to hear the application. The Court, as a first criteria, has always addressed its competence in determining an issue before dealing with the substance of the issue. The Applicants’ claim is for violation of Article 4 and 5 of the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights (ACHPR), Article 3 and 8 of the Universal Declaration on Human and People’s Rights (UDHR) and Section 33 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. They are claiming two declarations respectively towards the alleged unlawful and unjustifiable killing of Mr. Abutu Adamu (their father) and the failure to investigate, prosecute and compensate for the said unlawful and unjustifiable killing. Further, that the Court grants an order directing the Respondent to compensate the family of the deceased. The Court notes that pursuant to Article 9(4) of the Supplementary Protocol (A/SP.1/01/05), it “…has jurisdiction to determine cases of violation of human rights that occur in any Member States.” On this note this Court has established, or decided in several cases, that for it to have competence of jurisdiction to determine a matter before it allegations of human rights is key. The threshold that the Court uses to consider whether an application is properly before it was laid down in the case of MOUSSA LEO KEITA V. THE REPUBLIC OF MALI (2007) ECW/CCJ/JUD/03/07, where the Court held that it has a competence to adjudicate 5