ii) be made whilst the same matter has been instituted before another International Court for adjudication;" Consequently, he urged to join the action as an interested party. 17. To support his argument, the Intervener cites the Case Concerning ODELEYE V. ADEPEGBA, 2001 5 NWLR PT 706, P33 of the Court of Appeal of Nigeria where it was stated that there is an interest in the action as follows; There is an interest in the case, whenever; (a) The examination of a dispute between two parties directly and adversely affects the legitimate rights of a third party or his pecuniary interests; it is within the powers of the Court to allow that party to be joined as an intervener. (b) A person may be authorised to join a proceeding whenever he deems himself as having suffered a wrong or when he has been wrongfully deprived of something, or when the decision of a court is likely to affect him or infringe upon his rights. (c) A person is deemed to have an interest in a case, sufficient enough for him to intervene as a party, when it has been established that there exists a connection, a correlation or inter- dependence between the applicant and the case to which the application is related. (d) A person may be authorised to join a proceeding as a defendant, against the will of the applicant. (1) When the circumstances surrounding the case oblige the party to be authorised to join the proceedings, in order for the case to be duly examined; or (2) When the request of the applicant or defendant, as regards the dispute, may not be examined in an efficient and efficacious manner without the involvement of the intervener" Analysis of the Court Concerning the Jurisdiction 18. The close examination of the various pleas of action of the parties lead to the questions on whether electoral disputes, which is the main issue at the centre of the litigation, is subject to the legal order applicable to the community. In other words, the Court will delve into the provisions of ECOWAS Treaty, Protocols, Conventions and text relating thereto to examine same so as to know if the Court can adjudicate on issues relating to elections and disputes arising thereof. 19. Research shows that, in the current stage of legal texts applicable to ECOWAS, no provision, whether general or specific, gives the Court powers to adjudicate on electoral issues or matters arising therefrom. However, a dispute having a bearing on other rights of the parties may be referred to in any internal or related dispute relating to electoral issues like the present one. In such an instance, the ECOWAS Court of Justice, in accordance with Article 19 (1) of the 1991 Protocol, and particularly, with reference to Article 38 (1) (c) × 1. The Court, whose function is to decide in accordance with international law such disputes as are submitted to it, shall apply: c. the general principles of law recognized by civilized nations; of the Statute of the International Court of Justice could apply the general principles of law recognized by civilized nations. 20. But the Treaty, which is the fundamental law of ECOWAS, particularly the Protocols relating to the ECOWAS Court of Justice, only invests the Court with specific powers and prerogatives, insisting always on its mandate concerning the observance of law in their interpretation and application. 21. This is why, besides the electoral problem, there are grounds for us to ponder, in a second instance, on the competence of the Court when the Applicant raises the legal plea on right to fair hearing. The right to fair hearing is a human right derived from the concept of fair hearing; in this regard, 4