It is trite that the burden of proof rest on he who asserts the affirmative and not on he who denies. In the words of Lord Maugham in the case of Constantine line V. Imperial Smelting Corporation 1942 AC.154 at p.174, this ancient rule founded on consideration of common sense should not be departed from without strong reasons. The burden therefore, lies on the Applicant to establish their allegation. The 4th and 5th Applicants in establishing their claim, attached a medical report from an independent forensic experts group. In the report, the experts stated that the 4th and 5th Applicants suffered from chronic physical issues as well as heavy symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder. The physical and psychological findings when considered separately and together are highly consistent with the act of torture and ill-treatment that they allege. This report has not been contested by the Defendant and in the absence of any refute, this amounts to an admission. In Musa Saidykhan V. Republic of the Gambia 2010 CCJELR pg 178 para. 41 this Court observed that the evidence of the Plaintiff on the wounds was direct and credible enough for this court to accept it. The Court therefore found as a fact that the Plaintiff suffered physical injuries as he testified to. The Court also found that he underwent medical treatment in Dakar. Above all, the 5th Defendant escaped into exile and could not have been expected to exercise the higher burden of proof than the one allowed by the circumstance. 54