facts of the application may present a need for further examination of its admissibility outside the enshrined provision. 33. The Respondent raised a Preliminary Objection on the admissibility of the Application based on four prongs; a) Irregularity as to the form of the Application; b) Incompetence of the Court to review a national law; c) Lack of capacity of the Applicants being legal persons; d) Lack of locus standi of Applicants not being victims. 34. Thus while the Application has been declared to be in compliance with the provision of Article 10(d) (i) and (ii) of the Supplementary Protocol, it is imperative to examine the preliminary objections raised which are listed above. 35. Issues raised as a Preliminary Objection are such that can be adequately disposed of based on the claims and reliefs sought in the application. Issues of locus standi require the examination of all proof and evidence placed before it to determine their probative value. The Court will proceed to examine Preliminary Objections (a-c) while the last (d) objection relating to the locus standi of the Applicants being a matter of evidentiary proof will be addressed on merit. 36. The Court sitting on 23rd September 2021 heard the parties on the preliminary objections of the Respondent and ruled dismissing same while deferring the reasoning to be imputed in the final judgment. The Court will now proceed to give its reasons as ruled. 12