be in the interest of the public or general interest of the community that is; the legitimacy of purpose and b) the interference must be in accordance with the law; that is the legality of the law. The application of the safeguards of legitimacy of purpose and legality of the law is cumulative, in other words the non-compliance of any, and amounts to the violation of Article 14. 69. Even though the requirement for legality is stated as the last condition under the Article, it is imperative that interference with the right of property must first satisfy the requirement of legality. The principle of legality is inherent in the Charter as a whole and must be complied with whichever of the other conditions of the Article 14 applies. This is more so that no action can survive on illegality which is capture in the Latin phrase: Ex turpi causa non oritur actio. 70. The court will now proceed to first address the requirement of legality of the law that is to say the interference must to in accordance with the law. The purpose of the phrase “in accordance with the law” is to ensure that the scope for arbitrary tampering with rights by the executive is limited by domestic legislative or judicial authority. In FESTUS A.O. OGWUCHE V. FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA ECW/CCJ/JUD/02/18 @ pg. 23, the Court held that ‘…..the principle of legality is a fundamental aspect of all international human rights instruments and indeed the rule of law in general. It is a basic guarantee against the state’s arbitrary exercise of its powers. For this reason, any restriction on human rights must be “provided” or “prescribed” by law’. 71. The concept of “law” in this context is not confined to domestic legal processes but admits compliance with international human rights laws that impose international legal obligations on the state in question based on their signatory to such instrument. The Law must be accessible, sufficiently precise as well as provide for fair process that require State not act arbitrarily with safeguards against misuse of power by the State. JUSTICE PAUL UUTER DERY& 0RS Vs THE REPUBLIC OF LIBERIA ECW/CCJ/JUD/17/19 Pages 24-25 23