f- 83. It follows from the above consideration that the statement made by the Chairman of EFCC alleging that the deceased defrauded one Ole Nnana Kalu does not constitute a violation of presumption of innocence. Consequently, the Court holds that the Appiicants claim in this regard fails. X. REPARATIONS 84. Reparation or compensation is given for violation of hurnan rights that is concrete and real. Where there is no violation there wilt be no reparation. In MRS MODUPE DORCAS AFOLAL(I v. REPUBLIC OF NIGENA (2014) CCJELR 229 @ 245 para 69 theCourt stated that:"the principle ofreparation constitutes one of the fundamental principles of law regarding ltability. sfficient that the harm to be repaired must exist in reality, must h is be directly linked to the victim, and shall be true and capable of being evaluated" 85. Also in KAKIM MEISSA WADE v. REPUBLIC OF SENEGAL CCJELR 231 @ 257 para 93 the Court held (2013) that "Reparation of harm may only be ordered upon the condition that the harm in question is established to have really occurred, and that there is found to have existed a link of cause and 86. ffict between the offence committed and the harm ca?,tsed" The Court, having made findings in respect of Applicants' reliefs 'b', 'c' and 'd', it rernains their relief a' which prays for "An order that the Respondent pay an appropriante sum iin the discretio,n of thite CourQ i, ,o*p"nsationfor damages". 87. This Court having found the violation herein, holds that the Applicants are entitled to compensation which the Applicants have entrusted to the discretion of the Court. 26 4fu^ @