40. In addition, access to the Court for examination of any application is granted if the requirements of Article 10 of the Supplementary Protocol are met. In the instant case, which involves allegations of human rights violations made by an individual, Article 10(d) states that: “Individuals on application for relief for violation of their human rights; the submission of application for which shall: i). Not be anonymous; nor ii). Be made whilst the same matter has been instituted before another International Court for adjudication.” 41. In case Hadijatou Mani Koraou v. Republic ECW/CCJ/JUD/06/08), the ECOWAS of Niger (Ruling No. Court stated that the admissibility of an application must be examined on the basis of the sufficiency of the facts and of the alleged violations. 42. Similarly, in the case of Peter David v. Ambassador Ralph (DECISION No. ECW/CCJ/JUD/03/13), Uwechue the Court reaffirmed that the primary purpose of admissibility rules is to ensure that human rights are safeguarded in an effective and practical manner, applying procedural rules flexibly when necessary. 43, The Applicant identified herself as a victim of human rights violations. The Court finds that the application is neither manifestly unfounded under the above-mentioned article nor inadmissible for any other reason. As indicated in the Court's case law, the mere allegation of a human rights violation by an individual is, prima facie, sufficient to keep the case alive and proceed on to the analysis of the merits. 44. Consequently, the application is declared admissible. sO GB AL