153. The Court therefore dismisses the Applicants' allegation that their rights under Article 3 of the Charter were violated. E) The Allegation concerning the violation of all accepted principles of human rights and international law i) Applicants' Submissions 154. The Applicants also make a general submission that both the Kenyan and the Tanzanian Governments have violated all accepted principles of human rights and international law through their actions. ii) Respondent's Submissions 155. With regard to part of the allegation directed against it, the Respondent State submits that this allegation is not clear and specific. It argues that the Applicants have not specified with precision which principles and what areas of international law have been violated. In the opinion of the Respondent, the phrase "all accepted principles of human rights and international law" is vague and general. iii) The Court's Assessment 156. The Court has already dismissed the claim of the Applicants against the Government of Kenya for lack of personal jurisdiction as specified above (para. 44). 157. As far as the Respondent is concerned, the Court has previously decided that it can only examine a specific allegation of human rights violation only when either the facts indicating such violation or the nature of the right which was allegedly violated is adequately stated in the Application. 39 The instant allegation lacks precision in both respects. The Applicants have not clearly stated the specific right or principle of human rights or international law, which is said to be violated nor have they sufficiently indicated the factual basis of 39 See Tanganyika Law Society and The Legal and Human Rights Centre and Reverend Christopher Mtikila V. The United Republic of Tanzania, Application No 009&011/2011, para. 12, Peter Chacha Case, paras. 121. 122. 131, 134 40 ~ &-- V ~~S-~