as a brother, son, uncle or nephew. PW4 is therefore not an indirect victim before the law and the Court so holds. 52. The seventh Applicant – Favour Adah-Paul is a humanitarian worker who operates an orphanage to cater for orphaned children in Makurdi and she is the PW5. Excerpt of her testimony is as follows: Vembe: Can you give us an idea of the number of children you met in the camp, and how many you were able to take. PW5: As at that time, we met well over five thousand children in the camps. Some were staying by the road side, and that is where they sleep. So we started making breakfast to meet their nutritional needs at that time but for us to be able to do something, we had to bring about fifty of them at the start into my home, where after we got more conducive environment accommodation for them. As the attack continued, we got more kids, at a point, we had over two hundred children that were orphaned from these crisis in the orphanage homes that was established purposely to cater for the needs of orphans from the crises, because they were too many and we had little space, we could not take more. 53. From the testimony above, PW5 as the 7th Applicant was very instrumental in taking care of the Children who became orphaned from the crisis, she did not suffer any personal harm, injury or loss and has not established any direct link and personal interest to qualify her as a victim of violation of human rights. Having not fulfilled the requirement to be categorized as a victim, her application before this Court cannot be entertained for lack of locus standi. 54. Having examined the testimony of the five witnesses –three of whom are themselves Applicants in this case, Vis-à-vis the condition precedents to qualify an applicant as a victim which gives locus standi before this Court, it is clear that from their testimony, PW1, PW3 and PW5 have not established any loss or harm, damage or injury with direct link to them nor a personal interest to qualify them as victims to claim for themselves. The Court will now proceed to address the claims of the remaining Applicants who did not testify. 55. Applicants 2, 3, 4, 5,8,9,10,11 who did not testify in Court, but were named as such in the Initiating Application equally claimed reliefs for violation of their human rights under the earlier stated instruments both for themselves and on behalf of 23