are parties to this allegation. The status of the first Applicant has already been settled as being an improper party in respect of the allegation of the violation of this right. 47.Regarding the Current Applicants, being individuals, they are within the contemplation of Article 10 of the Charter as proper parties and are therefore qualified to bring an action for the violation of their guaranteed right to association. However, there must be established a nexus between the Current Applicants and the alleged violation to justify a claim of being victims of the Respondent’s action of suspending the activities of the Society. In other words the Current Applicants must prove they have the locus standi to institute the matter. In this regard the Court held thus: “the strict application of locus standi denotes that a Plaintiff wishing to sue must have sufficient interest in the subject matter in order to have a standing to litigate same.” FEDERATION OF AFRICAN JOURNALISTS & 4 ORS V. REPUBLIC OF THE GAMBIA ECW/CCJ/JUD/04/18 PAGE. 17; See also EBERE ANTHONIA AMADI & 3 ORS V. THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF NIGERIA JUDGMENT NO ECW/CCJ/JUD/22/19 PAGE. 13. 48.The Court is replete with decisions to the effect that only victims who have suffered personal damages due to the violation of their human rights can access the Court. “To plead a case before this Court one must have suffered a personal harm....” REGISTERED TRUSTEES OF THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC RIGHTS & ACCOUNTABILITY PROJECT (SERAP) V THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA AND 1 OR ECW/CCJ/JUD/19/16 PAGE 23. This obviously exempts cases of indirect victims. 49. Furthermore, “In order to substantiate an action concerning the violation of human rights, it is necessary that the applicant be a victim and that the 17