iii. Objection based on lack of interest to bring proceedings 50. The Respondent State alleges that the Applicant, under the cover of anonymity, filed a dozen unconnected Applications with the Court. It affirms that the Applications either sought to protect the rights of Mr. Lionel Zinsou, argue that the Constitutional Court of Benin is not independent or challenge the Penal Code. 51. It contends that in all of these applications, including the present one, the Applicant “does not demonstrate his personal interest to act. He does not present himself as a victim of human rights violations. It is the case, however, that as a matter of principle, legal action is predicated on, among other things, by capacity, standing and interest to act. The interest to act must be current, legitimate and personal”. 52. Consequently, the Respondent State submits that the Application should be declared inadmissible. * 53. On his part, the Applicant recalls that Article 5(3) of the Protocol does not require individuals or NGOs to demonstrate a personal interest in an application in order to seize the Court. He argues that the only requirement is that the Respondent State, in addition to being a party to the Charter and the Protocol, should have deposited the Declaration, without having to demonstrate victim status or a personal and direct vested interest. 54. The Applicant therefore prays that this objection be dismissed. *** 55. The Court notes that under Article 5(3) of the Protocol, “the Court may entitle Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) with observer status with the African Commission and individuals to bring cases directly before it”. 14