BENEFICIARIES OF LATE NORBET ZONGO & 4 ORS V. BURKINA FASO (REPARATIONS) 2015 1 AFCLR 258. 156. While the specific nature of the damage suffered by the Senegalese was not articulated, however, the Court is of the opinion that any violation of a guaranteed right necessarily wrought with it a form of damage. In the instant case the harm/damage naturally flowing from a violation of a right to peaceful assembly and expression of opinion is one of obvious distress, disappointment, frustration at the truncation of the opportunity to gather and express opinions on political matters affecting the Respondent State. This is more so that the ban has been active for over nine years from 20 July 2011 to the time of filing this Application on 14 September 2020. 157. The damages that will be imputed to the Senegalese will be non-pecuniary as the feelings and emotions above described are intangible and not capable of precise financial computation. Therefore an award for moral damages in form of an aggregate compensation in monetary form is deserving of the people. 158. The Court is however faced with a contradiction in the pleadings of the Applicants. On one hand they claim to institute this action in a representative capacity on behalf of the Senegalese which is reflected in their pleadings thus: Whereas the applicants therefore decided to file an action before the Court of Justice of the Economic Community of West African States against the Republic of Senegal for violation of the fundamental rights of Senegalese citizens” DOC 1 PAGE 3. 47