35.
The above provision raises two conditions precedent; the non-anonymity
of
the application and the absence of lis pendens before another international
court. The identity of the Applicants is clearly established by the Power of
Attorney executed in favour of their Attorney who filed the instant suit on
their behalf.
36.
In other words, one of the prerequisite to maintain an action before this Court
is that such action must not be pending before another international court. In
the case of uns. NAzuRE GIMES DE qINAv. THE REq{IBLIC oF GUINEE BISSAU
ECWCCJ/JUD/L5/IB unreported, the Court in its consideration held that:
"Admissibility
of a human rights violation case is to meet two
cumulative conditions, which are: the said case should neither be
ononymous
nor be taken before another international Court of
competent juris diction ".
37.
The Court reiterated this fact in the case of SAWAD)G) PAUL &
3 oRS v.
REPUBLIC OF BURzuNA FASO ECWCCJ/JUD/07/20 urreported, where it
held that:
".fro*
the provisions of
Article l0(d), it is clear that three conditions
must be met before an application can be declared admissible before
the Court. These are a) the applicants must be victims of human rights
violations, b) the applicants must not be anonymous, and c) the
application must have been instituted before another international
C ourt
38.
for adjudication
".
The import of the sub-section (ii) of Article 10 (d) is to avoid a situation where
several international bodies would
be
simultaneously dealing with
applications which are substantially the same.
39.
An examination of the facts of the present application reveals that the
Applicants prior to the filing this case, lodged a complaint before the African
1,L
J4*
ry
@