On jurisdiction i. Declares that it has jurisdiction. On admissibility ii. Declares the Application admissible. On merits iii. Finds that the alleged violation of judges’ right to strike, their right to information, freedom of opinion and expression, their right to form associations freely, and their right to freedom to assemble, protected respectively by Articles 8, 9, 10 and 11 of the Charter, is moot; iv. Finds that the Respondent State did not violate the right of citizens and judges to an effective remedy for the protection of their rights, protected by Article 7(1) of the Charter read together with Article 2(3)(a) of the ACDEG, Article 1(h) of the ECOWAS Protocol on Democracy and Article 8 of the UDHR; v. Finds that the alleged violations in connection with the constitutional amendment and with the Electoral Code are moot; vi. Finds that the alleged violations in connection with the COS-LEPI are moot. vii. Finds that the Respondent State violated Article 26 of the Charter in relation to the composition and functioning of the HJC; By a majority of Ten (10) for, and One (1) against, Justice Dennis D. ADJEI Dissenting, viii. Finds that the Respondent State violated Article 30 of the Protocol by failing to comply with the Court's decisions; 51