whether those local courts of Niger adhered or not to their jurisprudence or generally, to the national law of Niger. ” (§51). 43.Such abundant and relevant jurisprudence urges the Court to decline jurisdiction on that aspect of the Application which concerns the domestic law. 44.Whatever the case may be, it is undoubted that in the Application brought before the Court on 5 April 2017 by Hama Amadou against the Republic of Niger, he equally alleges violation of human rights, notably violation of the right to security, violation of the right to equality before the law, violation of the principle of nulla poena sine lege, violation of the right to fair trial and violation of the right to family life. 45.In accordance with Article 9(4) of the January 2005 Protocol, in the terms of which “The Court has jurisdiction to determine cases of violation of human rights that occur in any Member State”, and in line with Article 10(d) of the same Protocol which provides that “Access to the Court is open to ... individuals on application for relief for violation of their human rights ...”, the Honourable Court is competent to hear the instant case. B. REGARDING ADMISSIBILITY OF THE APPLICATION AND THE FORCE OF RES JUDICATA 46. In the terms of Article 10(d) of Supplementary Protocol A/SP.1/01/05 of 19 January 2005: “Access to the Court is open to ... individuals on application for relief for violation of their human rights ...”. 47.The application thus submitted shall not be anonymous nor be made whilst the same matter has been instituted before another International Cour for adjudication. 48.In the present case, the Court notes that an application for human rights violation has been submitted before it by Hama Amadou, claiming to a victim of those human rights violations as enumerated in the Initiating Application. Translator : E. Nkansah 12