such as those described in the instant case, residence or lack . I of it, is not a condition for standing to sue, as their claim is not based solely on the demolition but also on the alleged violation by the defendants of the 2nd to 11th Plaintiffs' right to peaceful demonstration, through the use of force, such as shooting at the protestors. The 2nd to 11th plaintiffs therefore have the standing to institute the present action. r 57. As to the 1st plaintiff, a Non-governmental Organization, the defendants contend that there is no public interest in the 1natter as to warrant it to institute and maintain this action. 58. The Court acknowledges that, according to a strict literal construction, only those directly affected by an act or omission violating their human rights can enjoy status of victim and have standing to lodge a complaint against the perpetrators of the said violation. However, even those jurisdictions which started embracing a strict literal interpretation of the concept of victim, for the purpose of human rights protection, have evolved into a more flexible approach in order to allow other persons, not directly affected by the alleged violation, to have access to the Court and seek justice, on behalf of the actual victim and to hold accountable the perpetrators. See this Court' s decision in ECW/CCJ/RUL/01/14 Mrs. Stella I f eoma Nnalue & 20 Ors I