50. Consequently, in protecting such redress and ensuring that their vulnerability is not exploited, a safeguard is put in place to ensure that individuals or organisations that represent them do so in the best interest of the said victims. Therefore in a representative Application, it is imperative that the Court is convinced that the victims willingly and knowingly delegated to such individuals or organization their inherent rights to seek redress by themselves. Therein lies the import of the requirement for mandate to act and the mischief it seeks to cure. 51.As earlier stated, the Court has no record of any mandate from the said inmates, the importance of which as highlighted supra is not only imperative but equally mandatory. Lack of such mandate in the instant case is therefore grave as it renders the Application incompetent. This consequence has been affirmed in a plethora of decisions by the Court as in the case below where in further confirmation of a mandate as a legal document that gives full power to act, it held thus: “....in the absence of such mandate, the Collectif des Association Contre l’impunite au Togo which claims to represent Mr. AGBETOGNON in the instant procedure cannot validly intervene in the case in such quality. Consequently, there is need to declare the Application as inadmissible”. COLLECTIF DES ASSOCIATION CONTRE L’IMPUNITE AU TOGO VS TOGO ECW/CCJ/JUD/12/18 PARAGRAPH 12&13. See also MME AZIABLEVI YOVO & 31 ORS V TOGO TELECOM & REPUBLIC OF TOGO ECW/CCJ/JUD/04/12, PARAGRAPH 38. 52.In view of the above analysis, the Application filed by Incorporated Trustees of Centre for Peace and Conflict Management in Africa and Rethink Africa Foundation on behalf of the 3 named inmates without a mandate from them 17