HORE SOCIO-CULTURAL ASSOCIATION V. FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA (2011) ECW/CCJ/RUL/11/12 (2012) CCJELR, PAGE 182, PARAGRAPH 28. 90.The summary of the preceding analysis is that a direct victim who has suffered personal and direct loss can bring an action for the violation of his/her human rights obviously without a mandate. On the other hand, an indirect victim who has not suffered directly is equally recognized to bring an action in a representative capacity on behalf of the direct victim. A mandate is waived where as in the case of death of the direct victim it is impossible or impracticable to obtain a mandate but a proof of affiliation to the victim must be established. Similarly, a legally recognized organization such as an NGO bringing an action in representative capacity on behalf of direct victims for public interest need no mandate to act. 91.Considering that a mandate to act is pivotal to the admission of an application under this circumstance, it is now appropriate to situate the instant Application within these perimeters to determine whether it is competent with regards to the requirement of mandate to act. This Application was filed by the Incorporated Trustees of Centre for Peace and Conflict Management in Africa and Rethink Africa Foundation on behalf of 7 death row inmates allegedly convicted for murder in various courts in Nigeria and thereafter sentenced to death. They are further alleged to be between the ages of 24 and 101 and have been on death row for a period ranging from 8 to 28. 92.The instant Application though brought by an NGO in a representative capacity for 7 individuals, same not being on behalf of deceased victims or 28