and will only admit cases from national courts where human rights violation are alleged in the course of the proceeding. See Private Alimu Akeem v. Federal Republic of Nigeria ECW/CCJ/RUL/05/11, Hissein Habre v. Republic of Senegal ECW/CCJ/RUL/03/10 and Messrs. Abdoulaye Balde & 5Ors. V. The Republic of Senegal ECW/CCJ/RUL/01/13. Jerry Ugokwe Vs Nigeria (2004-2009) CCJELR, Ocean King Vs Senegal ECW/CCJ/JUD/07/11, Bakare Sarres Vs Mali. Right to work. 80. The Applicants contend that arising from the allegation by the petitioner and the commencement of the unlawful impeachment process by the Judicial Council, they were suspended, placed on half salary with all allowances save the housing rent withdrawn. This they alleged violates their right to work and chosen employment contrary to Articles 23 of the UDHR, 6 of the ICESCR and 15 of the ACHPR. It is instructive that all the articles are pari-material to Article 15 of the ACHPR which is set out below: “Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just favorable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment”. 81. The Applicant raised the fact that the Respondent did not canvass any legal pleas to rebut this allegation and thus being undefended they urged the Court to enter judgement for them on this head. The court notes this observation but states that the fact that a claim is undefended does not guarantee instant judgement for the claimant. The Court is obliged to analyse the totality of the facts to decide whether the claim has been proved in the light of all possible legal requirement. The fact that the Applicants were suspended is undisputed by the Respondent. This does not ipso facto …entitle the Applicant to a declaration that their right to work has been violated. In reaching a decision on this alleged violation, the Court needs to ask a pertinent questions: DOES SUSPENSION FROM WORK PENDING AN INVESTIGATION AMOUNT TO VIOLATION OF THE RIGHT TO WORK? The right to work envisages the freedom to retain or stay on a job and earn the pay as agreed and not to be deprived of employment unfairly. In that regard, the African Commission in Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights & Associated Newspapers of Zimbabwe v Zimbabwe found a violation of Article 15 of the ACHPR 29