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 Defendants. 42. On the question of whether this suit amounts to re-litigating issues and claims which have been settled or pending before the competent courts in Nigeria, the Plaintiff submits that the argument of the 3rd Defendant is misleading, as the present suit is distinctively different from any other previous cases, that this suit raises fresh, ongoing and continuing Human Rights violations in the Niger Delta. He relied on the case of ALHADJI HAMMANI TIDJANI (supra). 43. On the absence of reasonable cause of action raised by the Defendants the Plaintiff contends that given the weight of the information relied on its application to the Court, including the report on the Niger Delta published by the amnesty International in 2009, it is misleading to argue that the present suit has not disclosed a reasonable cause of action against them. He referred to the Nigerian case of Thomas vs. Olufosoye (2004) 49 WRN 37 S.C on the definition of "reasonable cause of action". 44. He further stated that the 4th, 5th, 7th and 9th Defendants continuous action of extraction, dredging in the Niger Delta, contributes to the serious violation of the Human Rights recognized and guaranteed by the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights. 45. On the issue of its capacity to institute this suit, the Plaintiff contends that it is duly legally registered under the Company and allied Matters Decree 1 of 1990 of the federal Republic of Nigeria with Certificate of Incorporation (CAC/IT/NO. 17206) attached and marked ANNEXURE 'A" in the Plaintiff's Brief of Argument. The Plaintiff further reliedon its observer status with the African Commission, and also that the Court in the case of Registered Trustee of the SocioEconomic Rights and Accountability Project vs. The Federal Republic of Nigeria and Anor. Suit No ECW/CCJ/APP/08/08, correctly observed that the "Plaintiff (SERAP) is a Human Rights non governmental organization registered under the Laws of Federal Republic of Nigeria". 46. In response to the Defendant's argument that the present suit is statute barred, the Plaintiff contends that through the "continuing violation" doctrine, Courts have recognized an exception to the rigid application of the statute of limitation. The Plaintiff referred to the case of ALHADJI HAMMANI TIDJANI (supra). 47. The Plaintiff urges the Court to dismiss the preliminary Objections in its entirety as it lacks merit, and pray the Court to entertain and determine the present suit. CONSIDERATION OF THE GROUNDS AND ARGUMENTS OF THE PARTIES APPLICABILITY OF THE AFRICAN CHARTER ON HUMAN AND PEOPLES' RIGHTS, AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS TREATIES. 48. Article 4 of the Revised Treaty of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), 1993 provides for the applicability of the provisions of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights to Member States of the ECOWAS. Article 1 of the African Charter on Human Peoples rights provides that: http://www.worldcourts.com/ecowasccj/eng/decisions/2010.12.10_SERAP_v_Nigeria.htm Page 7 of 13