-7 11. The Plaintiff avers that the eleventh contradiction is that the Court’s position here contradicts its own cited position of the law on its Ruling in Paragraph 63 of the same judgment and an earlier decision of the Court in a similar case of unlawful dismissal in respect of EDOH KOKOU vs. ECOWAS COMMISSION, ECW/CCJ/APP/05/09 and ECW/CCJ/JUD/03/10, delivered on 8th day of July, 2010. The same settled principles generally stipulate that “an employee, who is unjustly dismissed from work protected by statute shall be entitled to his full back wages, inclusive of allowances, and to his other benefits or their monetary equivalent computed from the time his compensation was withheld from him up to the time of his actual reinstatement and that when reinstatement is not practicable, the employee is entitled to separation pay”. There is a contradiction herein that the award of claimed back wages, benefits and entitlements of the Plaintiff are omitted and the impression created that she is not entitled to same. 6.3. PROCEDURE 6.3.1. The initiating Application (Document number 1A) and a Summary, Document number 1B), were lodged in this Court on July 4, 2014. 6.3.2. The 1st and 2nd Respondents filed their Reply to the Plaintiff/Applicant’s Application (Document number 2), on January 22, 2015. 6.3.3. There is no indication that the other Defendants/Respondents ever filed any responsive pleading to the Application or any other paper for that matter 6.4. CONTENTIONS or REPLY OF THE DEFENDANTS/RESPONDENTS (WEST AFRICAN MONETARY AGENCY) The 1st and 2nd Defendants/Respondents react as follows on the above mentioned application, as follows: 1. The instant Application by the Plaintiff/Applicant/Judgment/Creditor is an abuse of Court process, a mirage, incompetent and inadmissible before this Honorable Court for the following reasons: a. Non compliance with Article 25 of the Protocol A/P1/7/91 and Article 92 of the Rules of the Community Court of Justice, ECOWAS;