of the Constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999.
b) Declare that the suit instituted against the ten Applicants from amongst the fifteen on the 1st of March
2004, for proceedings against them and their continued detention till 30th of March 2005, are unlawful, void
and amount to an infringement of Article 6 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights and
section 35 of the Nigerian Constitution.
c) Declare that their dispossession of MT Capbreton by the Defendants, since the 1st of December 2003,
then the destruction of this vessel and the Applicants' ejection from the said vessel between
January/February 2004 constitutes a violation of their Human Rights.
d) Declare that the Applicants are entitled to adequate compensation from the Defendants for
dispossessing them of MT Capbreton.
e) Declare that the refusal of the Defendants to compensate the Applicants for the spoliation and
dispossession constitutes a violation of their rights under Article 21 (2) of the African Charter on Human
and Peoples' Rights.
f) Declare that the parading of the Applicants before the International Press as common thieves and thieves
of Nigerian crude oil amounts to a destruction of their reputation as seamen and their right to human dignity
as entrenched by Article 5 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights.
g) Order the immediate release of all personal effects belonging to the Applicants on board MT Capbreton.
h). An order of injunction restraining the Defendants by themselves agents or privies from further arresting
or detaining the Applicants in connection with the case; and condemn them to pay damages and interest to
their Applications as set out in paragraph 40 to the facts in support.
8. After Service of the Application on the Defendants, the latter filed their responses in which they ask for
the rejection of the application for reparation presented by the 1st Defendants learned counsel representing
the 1st, 2nd, 4th, and 5th Defendants and the 2nd learned counsel representing the 3rd Defendant. They claim
justification for their acts in arresting, detaining and prosecuting the Applicants through two important
defences that of privy of contract of employment between the Applicants and their employers and the
statute of limitation as entrenched in Article 9 (3) [sic] of the Supplementary Protocol of the Court. The
claims of the Defendants are as follows:
a) Declare that the Applicants do not have claim to any relief sought in their Application for enforcement of
their fundamental human rights;
b) Declare that the arrest of the Applicants and their prosecution was constitutional, lawful and in
accordance with the laws of the Federal republic of Nigeria, that no violation of human rights occurred
under the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights;
c) Declare that no reputation of the Applicants was soiled, despite the fact that after the said trial they were
discharged and acquitted by the Federal High Court of Nigeria;
d) Declare that the claim is statute barred.
e) Order the dismissal of the claim on the grounds that it is arbitrary, speculative, lacked merit and an
abuse of the process of the Court;
Legal Arguments by the Parties and Considerations by the Court
9. Learned Counsel to the Applicant, Chief Emefo Esq. made the following legal submissions:
A. He submitted that by treaties, all Nations covenanted to enforce the provisions of the UN Charter on
Human Rights in all Member States that ascribed or assented to the Charter. In line with this, the learned
counsel contended that the detention of the Applicants from the 1st of December 2003 to 30th November
4