Court is a criminal case while the case before this Court is an alleged violation of the Applicant’s human right guaranteed under international human rights instruments. The Applicant approached this Court via an Application containing his full particulars and as such is not anonymous. The present suit is also not pending before any international Tribunal or Court. Thus, the issue of due process raised by the Defendant is misconceived and goes to no issue. The Court in BAKARE SARRE Vs. MALI (2011) CCLR 57 categorically stated that once the human rights allegedly violated involves the international or Community obligations of a State, it will exercise jurisdiction. On the face of the Application presented by both parties, it is beyond contention that the issues raised above are human rights issues and within the subject matter jurisdiction of this Court as provided under Article 9 of the Supplementary Protocol, and the Court so holds. The second issue is “whether the pendency of the case before a domestic Court ousts the jurisdiction of this Court as alleged by the Defendant”. Ouster of a Court’s jurisdiction is not a matter of course. For a Court’s jurisdiction to be ousted, it must be clearly shown that the particular action complained against falls outside its defined jurisdiction. 28