water, these allegations fall within the ambit of internationally protected rights which if substantiated will amount to violations of human rights. By virtue of Articles 9(4) and 10(d) of the Supplementary Protocol this Court has jurisdiction to determine cases of violation of human rights that occur in any Member State and individuals have direct access to it for application for relief for violation of their human rights. In Serap V. Federal Republic Of Nigeria & 4 ors, (2014) ECW/CCJ/JUD/16/14 (unreported), the Court held that the mere allegation that there has been a violation of human rights in the territory of a member State is sufficient prima facie to justify the jurisdiction of this Court on the dispute, surely without any prejudice to the substance and merits of the complaint which has to be determined only after the parties have been given the opportunity to present their case, with full guarantees of fair trial. In Bakary Sarre & 28 ors Vs. Senegal (2011) (unreported) Pg. 11, Para. 25, the Court held that its competence to adjudicate in a given case depends not only on its texts, but also on the substance of the Initiating Application. The Court accords every attention to the claims made by the Applicants, the pleas in law invoked, and in an instance where human right violation is alleged, the Court equally carefully considers how the parties present such allegations. 15