authorities, notably the courts, to resolve problems of interpretation of domestic legislation. The Court’s role is confined to ascertaining whether the effects of such an interpretation are compatible with the Convention.” 60.The Court in adhering to its jurisprudential reasoning not to usurp the powers of national courts to examine the laws of Member States, has nonetheless not reneged on or negated its mandate to determine cases of human rights violations that occur in Member States. To this end, where in a given application before it, there exists complaint about any human rights violation occasioned by application of any national legislation, to the extent of such violation, this Court will examine the national legislation in the context and pursuit of protection of the human rights concerned. In other words, this Court shall, where a case is brought before it, examines impugned legislations to ascertain whether or not the application of that impugned legislation constitutes a violation of human rights with the view to directing a review. See OBINNA UME & 6 ORS v. FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA (UNREPORTED) JUDGMENT NO. ECW/CCJ/JUD/10/20. 61.In the case of FEDERATION OF AFRICAN JOURNALIST v. THE REPUBLIC OF THE GAMBIA, (2018) JUDGMENT NO. ECW/CCJ/JUD/04/18 (UNREPORTED), the Court reviewed the question whether it can examine an impugned provision of the laws of a Member State with the view to compelling amendments where necessary. In that case, the Applicants impugned some statutory provisions of The Gambian Criminal Code and the Information and Communication (Amendment) Act by submitting that the continued application of those provisions violated their 25