her, the entire action is predicated on alleged disobedience of the Orders of Nigerian Courts, and that the procedure provided for by Nigerian laws have not been complied with. He cited some Nigerian authorities and urged the Court to dismiss and/or strike out this action for want of jurisdiction stemming from incompetency in initiating the Application against the Defendant. The Applicant, in his reply to the issues raised by the Defendant, submitted as follows; a. That the Application is not for contempt of Nigerian Courts but for enforcement of the human rights of the Applicant as contained in the narration of facts. b. That the Court has jurisdiction to entertain this suit by virtue of the provisions of Article 9 (4) of the Supplementary Protocol A/SP.1/01/05 relating to the Community Court of Justice which confers jurisdiction on the Community Court of Justice to determine cases of violation of human rights that occur in any Member State. That the Defendant is a Party to that treaty and therefore bound by it. c. That the Defendant is also a signatory to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, the International Covenant on Civil 17