appropriate laws.” See DEXTER OIL LIMITED V. REPUBLIC OF LIBERIA NO ECW/CCJ/JUD/03/19. 83. Even though the requirement for legality is stated as the last condition under the Article, it is imperative that interference with the right of property must first satisfy the requirement of legality. The principle of legality is inherent in the Charter as a whole and must be complied with cumulatively with other conditions of Article 14. This is imperative, as no action can survive on an illegality, which is captured in the Latin phrase: Ex turpi causa non oritur actio. 84. The Court will now proceed to first address the requirement of legality of the law that is to say the interference must be in accordance with the law. 85. The purpose of the phrase “in accordance with the law” is to ensure that domestic legislative or judicial authority limits the scope for arbitrary tampering with rights by government. The Court amplified this when it held that “…the principle of legality is a fundamental aspect of all international human rights instruments and indeed the rule of law in general. It is a basic guarantee against the state’s arbitrary exercise of its powers. For this reason, any restriction on human rights must be “provided” or “prescribed” by law.” In FESTUS A.O. OGWUCHE V. FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA unreported ECW/CCJ/JUD/02/18 @ pg. 23 See also GOGITIDZE AND OTHERS v. GEORGIA (Application no. 36862/05) STRASBOURG 12 May 2015. 86. The concept of “law” in this context is not confined to domestic legal processes but admits compliance with international human rights laws that impose international legal obligations on the state in question based on them being party to such instrument. The law must be accessible, sufficiently precise, as well as provide 32