intimidation in the way proceedings were conducted. The Applicants contend that the Court (domestic) ordered that they represent themselves when Counsel withdrew without giving the Applicants the opportunity to obtain new Counsel. The Applicants contend that they were prosecuted and convicted because they associated with the 1st and 32nd Applicants. The Applicants aver that they were remanded in prison before they were arraigned in court. The Applicants maintain that the records of proceedings will indicate apparent physical injuries on the 26th to 31st Applicants, that they were arraigned on the 4th May, 2016 which was two weeks after the arrest, allowing injuries to heal. The Applicants submit that facts not challenged are deemed admitted; the Respondent’s admission as contained in their statement of defense proves the Applicants’ reliefs sought. The Respondent responded to the Applicants reply and maintained their defense. Applicants’ Reply The Applicants filed their reply to the Respondent’s defense on the 28th September, 2016. They maintained that the 21st to 31st Applicants were arrested on the 14th of April, 2016 alongside the late Ebrima Solo Sadeng. That the 1st Applicant then received information that the persons arrested were subjected to torture by the security officials of the Respondent and that Ebrima Solo Sadeng had died as a result injuries sustained from the torture. That the 26th-28th Applicants were seriously injured and on the brink of death. That it was on this premise the 1st Applicant and others decided to walk towards the head-quarters of the Police intervention unit to demand the release of the deceased and other detainees but were indiscriminately attacked by the agents of the Respondent. That the attack was characterized by excessive force, tear gas, batons and gun butts which made it disorderly, as a result of which the 1st- 19th Applicants were injured. The Applicants added that the said injuries were apparent when the 8