in support, the Court will now consider the issues that require serious consideration in the preliminary objections before delving into the substantive matter, if necessary. We hold that there are four major issues to be determined at this stage, namely: a. Whether the first Applicant is a legal person and not being a victim or related to a victim, have a standing to institute the present action on behalf of the deceased victims. b. Whether the facts put forward by the Applicants have disclosed any cause of action. c. Whether the action as presently constituted is an abuse of Court process and/ or an academic exercise as alleged by the 3rd Defendant. d. Whether the 2nd Defendant and by implication the 3rd Defendant are proper parties to this suit. The Court will briefly consider these issues seriatim. a. Whether the 1st Applicant is a legal person and not being a victim, or related to a victim have a standing to institute the present action? The Defendants raised in their objection the legal capacity of the 1st Plaintiff to institute the present action. They rightly contended that locus standi is a condition precedent to the determination of a case on its merit. Where the Plaintiff have no standing to bring the action, the suit is incompetent and divests the Court of jurisdiction to entertain same. They further contended that where standing order is lacking the action must fail. They relied in the case of ODAFE Vs. ECOWAS COUNCIL OF MINISTERS & 2 ORS SUIT N°: ECW/CCJ/APP/05/07 where this Court held that since the Applicant has not personally or by his organization suffered any harm he does not have the locus standi to bring the application and it was thus declared inadmissible. They also relied in SERAP Vs. FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIASUIT N°: ECW/CCJ/APP/09/11, RULLING N° 14