53.Having found that the Application is premised on an allegation of violation of human rights, the Court dismisses the objection of the Respondent in this wise and holds that it has jurisdiction to adjudicate over the Application On the Court sitting on appeal over decisions of national courts 54.The Respondent also objects to the jurisdiction of the Court on the basis that the Applicants are seeking the Court to sit on appeal over the decisions of the national courts of the Respondent, which convicted them. 55.In their response, the Applicants state that they do not intend that the Court sits on appeal over the decisions of the domestic courts. They submit that it is clear from the reliefs claimed in their Application that they have not invoked an appellate jurisdiction of the Court and consequently, the Respondent’s submissions in that regard are totally irrelevant and should be dismissed. ******* 56.The Court recalls that it has in its plethora of cases affirmed that it has no jurisdiction to examine or sit on appeal on the decisions of national courts and cannot reverse the decision of a national Court. So where the subjectmatter of the dispute essentially has to do with re-examining of judgments already delivered by domestic courts, the matter will be dismissed. See MADAM ISABELLA MANAVI AMEGANVI & ORS V. THE REPUBLIC OF TOGO JUDGMENT NO ECW/CCJ/JUG/06/12 PAGE 6. AND PTE ALIMU AKEEM V. REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA ECW/CCJ/JUD/01/14 PAGE 10. 18