64.The Respondent further contends that the admissibility of this case by the Court for determination will obviously involve adjudicating on matters already determined by a national court thus sitting as an appellate court. The Respondent argues that the instant case is an invitation by the Applicant to the Court to serve as an appellate court to review and determine the correctness of decisions already made by the Supreme Court of Liberia and its Legislative Assembly. 65.This Court has in its flourishing jurisprudence held that it lacks the jurisdiction to sit on appeal over decisions of national courts. In BAKARE SARRE v. MALI, (supra) the Court in determining the import and propriety of the Plaintiffs’ application held that: “The said application substantially seeks to obtain from the Court a reversal of judgment delivered by the Supreme Court of Mali and seeks to project the Court of Justice of ECOWAS as a court of cassation over the Supreme Court of Mali. Viewed from that angle, the Court declared that it had no jurisdiction to adjudicate on the matter.” 66.See also OCEAN KING NIGERIA LIMITED v. REPUBLIC OF SENEGAL (2011) CCJELR 139, Para. 66, pg. 161 in which this position was reiterated that this Court does not compose itself as an appellate court over decisions of national courts and other national administrative bodies that are vested with investigative and quasi-judicial powers . It is therefore not in doubt that the Community Court of Justice, ECOWAS, is not an appeal court before which cases decided by the courts in Member States could still be brought. (See the case of DR. MAHAMAT SEID ABAZENE v. THE REPUBLIC OF MALI & 2 ORS (2010) CCJELR 95. 27