91. The Court is equally persuaded by the decision of the Supreme Court of Nigeria wherein it upheld the decision of the Court of Appeal that declared a nullity, a judgement delivered by a judge who did not sit with the others on the 6th of February 2019 to hear the proceeding in a Governorship election. The apex Court was of the opinion that his absence at one of the sittings certainly affected the competence of the tribunal stating further that; “….any defect in the composition of a tribunal is a nullity no matter how thoroughly or properly it was concluded, also the sitting or participation by members in the proceedings must always be maintained and consistent throughout the proceedings right from the beginning to the end of the proceedings. Where for any reason a judge is absent or indisposed the proceedings must be adjourned” ADELEKE vs OYETOLA 2020 6 NWLR 449 92. Having found that the recommendation of the Committee is a nullity, same therefore has no legal validity and can confer no right nor impose any obligation on anybody. The Court therefore holds that the issuance of a warning letter and placing the Applicant on the judicial watch list having being rendered by an incompetent tribunal is a violation of his right to fair hearing contrary to Article 7 of the Charter. 93. Whether the Applicant is entitled to the reliefs sought. The general principle of law is that where there is injury, there must be a remedy (Ubi Jus Ibi Remedium). This right to a remedy is one of the fundamental principles of International Law enshrined in various International Treaties such as the ICCPR Article 2(3), ICERD Article 6, and CAT Article 14 and also affirmed by various international and regional courts. 94. It is important to note that while violation of human rights attracts remedy however not all reliefs sought can be granted as some may be outside the mandate of the court. Furthermore even where there is an established violation as in the instant case, it is still paramount to link the violation to the harm or alleged prejudice/harm, in other words there must be a proof of a causative link. Causation encompasses the immediate impact of the injury e.g. death leads to funeral expenses, dismissal results in loss of income etc. This was further espoused by the apt illustration hereunder by The Inter-American Court in ALOEBOETOE et al v SURINAME 15 Inter-Am. Ct. H.R. (ser. C) para. 51 (1993 “…..every human act produces diverse consequences, some proximate and others remote. An old adage puts it as follows: causa causae est causa causati. Imagine 27