SERAP v. Nigeria, Ruling, Suit No: ECW/CCJ/APP/08/09 and RUL. No: ECW/CCJ/APP/07/10 (ECOWAS, Dec. 10, 2010) 1/25/21, 1:48 PM 18. AN ORDER directing the Defendants to ensure full enjoyment of the people of Niger Delta to an adequate standard of living, including adequate access to food, to health care, to clean water to clean and healthy environment; to socio - economic development, and the right to life and human security and dignity. 19. 19. AN ORDER directing the 1st & 2nd Defendants to hold the 4th , 5th , 6th , 7th , 8th and 9th Defendants responsible for their complicity in the continuing serious Human Rights violations in the Niger Delta. 20. AN ORDER compelling the 1st and 2nd Defendants to solicit the views of the people of the area throughout the process of planning and policy - making on the Niger Delta. 21. AN ORDER directing the government of Nigeria to establish adequate regulations for the operations of multinationals in the Niger Delta, and to effectively clean - up and prevent pollutions and damage to Human rights. 22. AN ORDER the government of Nigeria to carry out a transparent and effective investigation into the activities of oil companies (3rd - 9th Defendant herein) in the Niger Delta and to bring to justice those suspected to be involved and/ or complicit in the violations of Human Rights highlighted above. 23. AN ORDE directing the Defendants individually and/ or collectively to pay adequate compensation of 1Billion Dollars(USD) ($ 1 billion) to the victims of Human Rights violations in the Niger Delta, and other forms of reparation that the Honorable Court may deem fit to grant. 24. The Applicant in filling this application is relying on the following: a) African Charter on Human and People's Rights. b) The International Convention on Civil and Political Rights. c) The rules of the Community Court of Justice d) The Supplementary Protocol A/SP 1/01/05 amending the Protocol (A/P 1/7/91) relating to the Community Court of Justice. 25. The Initiating application was duly served on the Defendants who have filed their preliminary objections respectively, except the 1st and second Defendant who are yet to respond to the application. PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS BY DEFENDANTS 26. The 3rd Defendant began its defense by objecting to the competence of the plaintiff to institute this action alleging that the plaintiff does not have access to this Honourable Court. In addition to that, 3rd Defendant contents that that the jurisdiction given to yhe Court does not extend to dispute between individuals and therefore the Court lacks jurisdiction over the 3rd Defendant. The 3rd Defendant further states that the plaintiff does not have locus standi to institute the action for and on behalf of the people of Niger Delta. Finally the 3rd Defendant asks the Court to stop the Plaintiff from relitigating issues and claims which have been settled or pending before competent courts in Nigeria. http://www.worldcourts.com/ecowasccj/eng/decisions/2010.12.10_SERAP_v_Nigeria.htm Page 4 of 13