44. Also, in LINDA GOMEZ & 5 ORS V. REPUBLIC OF THE GAMBIA, Suit No.
ECW/CCJ/APP/18/12 at paragraph 27, where the Court stated as follows:
“It is clear that the Court has neither jurisdiction to annul domestic
legislations of ECOWAS Member States nor the jurisdiction to act as
appellate Court over their domestic Courts”.
The objection that adjudicating on this matter will amount to sitting on appeal of
the Respondent decision is not founded and the Court so holds.
45. The court is also called upon to address the issues of res judicata in the context
that the facts of the case at the national court are the same with the instant. From
the pleas of both parties it is undisputed that the Applicants’ cause of action in the
national court was premised upon the following:
46. That the petition, due to the public disclosure of evidence on which it was based
is null and void; That the action of the judicial council was constitutionally illegal;
That the petitioner lacked juridical capacity to carry out the investigation being
unknown to Law; That the investigation by the Police Service was illegal. On the
other hand, the case at hand is purely on allegation of violation of right to fair
hearing, right to privacy, right to work and equality before the law. Additionally the
parties are not the same: whilst the current case is against the Respondent:
Republic of Ghana, the national cases were against several parties including the
petitioner, the Chief Justice, the Attorney General, the judicial Council and the head
of the Police force. The principle of res judicata contemplates similar facts and same
parties. In view of the above, the Court reiterates that it is not an appellate court
and the facts do not lend credence to the operation of res judicata.
47. The Court under its Human Rights mandate in Articles 9 (4) and 10 (d) of the
protocol A/P.1/07/91 and supplementary protocol A/SP.1/01/05 ‘has jurisdiction
to determine cases of violation of human rights that occur in any Member State’
while giving access to ‘individuals on application for relief for the violation of their
human rights’. In Registered Trustees of the Socio-Economic Rights &
Accountability Project (SERAP) v. Federal Republic of Nigeria & Another,
ECW/CCJ/APP/08/2009, this Court on an application by the 2nd Defendant alleging
that this Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain an action filed by the plaintiff in which
15