173. Thus, in a proceeding where the party to whom the burden of proof is to be imposed complies with it, such party shall enjoy the benefit of the presumption and, as such, it will be for the counterpart to counteract the evidence produced. 235 - In this case, having the defendant State contradicted the alleged facts, the burden of proof rests with the applicant, who must show the facts it has pleaded, using all legal means and providing all the evidence, and there must be a link between that and the alleged facts that make them convincing. 175. Indeed, in this regard, the Court wrote in the judgment ECW/CCJ/JUD/01/10, delivered in the case Daouda Garba v. Republic of Benin20 that: “cases of violation of human rights must be backed by indications of evidence which will enable the Court to find that such violation has occurred in order for it to proffer sanctions if need be.” And further noted that “It is a general rule in law that during trial the party that makes allegations must provide the evidence, The onus of constituting and demonstrating evidence is therefore upon n the litigating parties. They must use all the legal means available and furnish the points of evidence which go to support their claims. The evidence must be convincing in order to establish a link with the alleged fact.” 176. Also in Judgment ECW/CCJ/JUD/02/12, delivered in the case Femi Falana & Anor v. Republic of Benin & 2 Ors21, the Court wrote that: “As always, the onus of proof is on the party who asserts a fact and who will fail if that fact failed to attain the standard of proof that would persuade the Court to believe the statement of the claim…” 177. It is a settled case-law that the facts can be proved by supporting documents. 178. In this case, the applicant gathered “Annexure 3” as a document to demonstrate its allegations of violation of its associates’ rights to freedom of expression, when they were arrested and detained based on interpretation and enforcing of the provisions of Section 24 of the aforementioned law. 20 21 Suit No ECW/CCJ/APP/09/09 (in CCJLR 2010), pag.12 parag.35. Suit No ECW/CCJ/APP/10/07 (2012) pag. 34. e 35. 40