Higher Court, it will be absurd for a party to enforce the same judgment as it will impose a fait accompli on the Appellate Court. On the 18th of April 2016, the Respondents filed an application for stay of proceedings before this Court pending the outcome of the appeal they filed before the Supreme Court of Liberia. They also annexed a copy of the petition for the writ of prohibition in that regard. On the 2nd day of March, 2017, the Respondents filed a motion to enter a new plea wherein they submitted that the Supreme Court of Liberia on the 17 th of February, 2017, ruled and entered final judgment setting aside the judgment obtained by the Applicant in this case against the Respondents in the sum of $15,900,000.00. Respondents further attached a copy of the said judgment marked as annexure M/1 in proof thereof. The Respondent having explored its right of Appeal and obtained judgment setting aside the decision of the Circuit Court being the subject matter before this Court, now the question is, what is the basis upon which this Court is to render its decision? In view of the above decision, it can be rightly said that the plank upon which the Applicant’s claim is founded has been vacated in view of the decision of the Supreme Court which supersedes that of the Circuit Court. Consequently, the Court holds that deciding on this matter will amount to an exercise in futility as the Applicant’s right in this regard is unfounded. Now the Court will consider whether it has the requisite jurisdiction to sit on appeal over decisions of national courts, and or compel a member state to enforce a judgment of its national court. This Court has severally drawn a distinction between its lack of jurisdiction to examine the decisions of national courts and its jurisdiction to hear cases of human rights abuses arising therefrom. From the facts before the Court, it is clear that the purport of the Applicant’s application is for this Court to direct the Respondent to pay to the Applicant the judgment sum of $15,900,000.00 with interest at the rate of 21% per annum from the date the decision was given by the Circuit Court to the date of final liquidation. This Court has consistently held that it cannot sit on appeal over decisions of national Courts of Member States. 10