the suit before this Court is one of a series of proceedings contrived by the Applicants to frustrate their obligation to directly confront the audio visual evidence of their engagement in corrupt and unethical conduct whilst acting as judges of the High Court of the Republic of Ghana. 34. The Respondent contend that the issues raised in this suit have been finally and effectually adjudicated upon by the Courts of competent jurisdiction in Ghana and that bringing it before this Court amounts to an abuse of Court process. That by assuming jurisdiction, this Court will be turned to an Appellate forum which it cannot rightly assume. They further contend that the issues in this application are caught up by the doctrine of res-judicata. SUMMARY OF PLEAS IN LAW OF THE RESPONDENT. THE RIGHT TO A FAIR HEARING 35. The Respondent rely on Article 10 of Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 14 (1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which are in pari-material with Article 7(1) (a) of the African charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights which states that: “Every individual shall have the right to have his cause heard. This comprises: (a) the right to an appeal to competent national organs against acts of violating his fundamental rights as recognized and guaranteed by conventions, laws, regulations and customs in force;(emphasis mine)” Respondent argue that Applicants were heard by many Superior court of records in Ghana and lost the cases and that all they should have done was to seek for a judicial review of the Supreme Court decision if they were not satisfied. The RIGHT TO PRIVACY 36. Respondent says that the Applicants relied on Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which provides that; “No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation” 12