and neck of fibula, abdomen wounds and fracture of their hands and other limbs and therefore permanently mutilating their body and robbing them of their ability to secure a dignified livelihood and thereby constituting a breach of their fundamental rights. 4. AN ORDER of this Honourable Court directing the Defendants to settle the cost of this action as incurred by the Applicants AND 5. Any other further orders that the Court may deem fit to make. Upon the service of the originating application, the Defendants raised preliminary objections to the suit and the Court took arguments on the objections of the Defendants and decided to rule on the preliminary objections as well as the substantive suit in one judgment. 3. PRELIMINARY OBJECTION OF THE DEFENDANTS. 1. The First Defendant. The First Defendant in her preliminary objection (Document No 2) sought an order striking out her name from the suit and also dismissing the Applicants’ suit dated the 24th day of February, 2014 on the grounds that; i. The 1st Applicant lacks the locus standi to bring this application, as it lacks legal personality and is not a victim or relative of the victim of any human rights violation, nor does it have any evidence of authority of the persons or relatives of the persons it represents. ii. That the Applicants disclosed no cause of action as the victims actually received medical attention. iii. That the 1st Defendant is under a duty placed on her by the Constitution of Nigeria to protect the lives and properties of the citizens of Nigeria and the Constitution is superior to all laws, including statutes, conventions, enactments and treaties. iv. That the law enforcement agents acted within the law and in a situation of justifiable necessity. v. That the Applicants’ request for monetary compensation cannot be granted in view of the circumstances of the case. The notice of preliminary objection was supported by a twelve paragraph affidavit sworn to by one Mr. Nnamdi Ekwem, a Nigerian citizen of Gwandal Center, Plot 8