highlighted in one of its jurisprudence, “granting this application is
tantamount to interfering with the criminal proceedings initiated and
pending before the Togolese Courts”; that it is clear from the above that the
Court has no jurisdiction even to hear the main application submitted by the
Applicant and relating to the suspension of the criminal proceedings in
progress nor to rule on the application for an interim measure does not fall
within the Court’s jurisdiction.
95. As provided in Article 21 of the 2005 Additional Protocol “The court
may, whenever a dispute is submitted before it, order the provisional
preparatory inquiries that it deems necessary or opportune”.
96. And, as follows from Article 79 of the Court’s Rules of Procedure: “(1)
An application under Article 20 of the Protocol shall state the subject- matter
of the proceedings, the circumstances giving rise to urgency and the pleas of
fact and law establishing a prima facie case for the interim measures applied
for.” and that “(2) The application shall be made by a separate document
and in accordance with the provisions of Articles 32 and 33 of these Rules.”.
97. In the instant case, the Applicant has complied with the provisions of
Article 79 (2) of the Rules.
98. However, it follows from the said precept that three conditions are
required for the imposition of interim measures, as described by this Court,
in the case, GODSWILL MRAKPOR ET 5 OTHERS v. AUTHORITY OF
HEADS OS STATE AND GOVERNMENT, ECOWAS & ANOR, Judgment
No. ECW/CCJ/JUD/01/11 of 18 March 2018, where it ruled that: “… the
court would not be in a position to order the interim measures asked for
except upon fulfillment of three conditions:
22