delivered, the State violated both the right to property (Article 21 ACHR) and the right to judicial protection (Article 25 ACHR) of the American Convention with respect to the above named individuals.” In WIECZOREK v. POLAND, (Application no. 18176/05) Judgment of 8 December 2009, the ECHR held that: “Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention does not guarantee, as such, any right to a pension of a particular amount. However, where an individual has an assertable right under domestic law to a contributory social insurance pension, such a benefit should be regarded as a proprietary interest falling within the ambit of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 for persons satisfying its requirements.” 20. This Court find persuasive the above decisions of both the Inter-American court of Human rights and especially the European Court of Human Rights which recognize pension as a property based on application of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the European Convention which is in pari material to Article 14 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights In light of the above, the Court holds the view that pension is property which can be vested on an individual the denial of which therefore constitutes a violations of Right to property within the context of Article 14 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights. Following from the foregoing factual and legal considerations the Court hold that it is imbued with the requisite competence to admit this application as it is founded on alleged violation of human rights to property contrary to Art 14 of the ACHPR. The preliminary objection of the Respondent is hereby dismissed. WHETHER IN LIGHT OF THE TOTALITY OF FACTS AND EVIDENCE ADDUCED, THE APPLICANTS HAVE SUFFICIENTLY ESTABLISHED THEIR CASE TO GROUND THE RELIEFS SOUGHT 10