35. The above provision raises two conditions precedent; the non-anonymity of the application and the absence of lis pendens before another international court. The identity of the Applicants is clearly established by the Power of Attorney executed in favour of their Attorney who filed the instant suit on their behalf. 36. In other words, one of the prerequisite to maintain an action before this Court is that such action must not be pending before another international court. In the case of uns. NAzuRE GIMES DE qINAv. THE REq{IBLIC oF GUINEE BISSAU ECWCCJ/JUD/L5/IB unreported, the Court in its consideration held that: "Admissibility of a human rights violation case is to meet two cumulative conditions, which are: the said case should neither be ononymous nor be taken before another international Court of competent juris diction ". 37. The Court reiterated this fact in the case of SAWAD)G) PAUL & 3 oRS v. REPUBLIC OF BURzuNA FASO ECWCCJ/JUD/07/20 urreported, where it held that: ".fro* the provisions of Article l0(d), it is clear that three conditions must be met before an application can be declared admissible before the Court. These are a) the applicants must be victims of human rights violations, b) the applicants must not be anonymous, and c) the application must have been instituted before another international C ourt 38. for adjudication ". The import of the sub-section (ii) of Article 10 (d) is to avoid a situation where several international bodies would be simultaneously dealing with applications which are substantially the same. 39. An examination of the facts of the present application reveals that the Applicants prior to the filing this case, lodged a complaint before the African 1,L J4* ry @