WHETHER THE PLAINTIFFS ARE ENTITLED TO MONETARY COMPENSATION A range of international and regional human rights treaties and declarative instruments contain an explicit right to compensation for human right violations. Remedies for gross violations of international human rights law and serious violations of international humanitarian law include the victim’s right to equal and effective access to justice, adequate, effective and prompt reparation for harm suffered and access to relevant information concerning violations and reparation mechanisms. Article 8 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states: "Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law" It is a general principle of law that any violation of an international obligation that has produced damage entails the obligation to make reparations. In Hadijatou Mani Karaou V The Republic of Niger, (2004-2009 CCJELR 217 @ 242): the court having found that the Republic of Niger failed to protect the plaintiffs right in regards to the practice of slavery as a result of which the plaintiff suffered undeniable physical, psychological and moral harm, held that she is entitled to an all-inclusive relief in reparation for the harm suffered and awarded 10,000,000 francs CFA. In the Inter-American Court of Human Rights Case of the “Street Children” (VillagránMorales et al.) v. Guatemala supra the Court held: “Reparation of the damage resulting from the violation of an international obligation requires, whenever possible, full restitution which consist in the reestablishment of the previous situation. The respondent State may not invoke provisions of domestic law in order to modify or fail to comply with its obligation to make reparation- all aspects of which (scope, nature, forms and determination of the beneficiaries) are regulated by international law. In the instant case, the Plaintiffs in instituting this suit, are seeking redress for the unjustified and unlawful death of their sole benefactor by the agents of the Defendant. The Court notes that the Applicants have without a shred of doubt, suffered a great loss as a result of the unjustified and unreasonable actions of the agents of the 31