The ECOWAS Court, yesterday, dismissed a suit filed by a Nigerian woman, Lovina Adonor, seeking to compel the Federal Government to pay her reparation for the destruction of her shrine.

The Tide source reports that Adonor, a self-acclaimed priestess, had filed the suit marked: ECW/CCJ/APP/61/22, seeking the enforcement of her fundamental human rights against Nigeria.

Adonor had in her submission claimed that her shrine was attacked and vandalised by some private individuals, forcing her to flee the community due to threats to her life.

She also alleged that the Nigerian government failed to provide adequate protection, investigate her complaints, or address the destruction of her religious materials and property.

According to the applicant, the incident was tantamount to the violation of her right to propagate her religion, the right to security, and the right to own property without discrimination.

She had argued that such violated rights were encapsulated under ECOWAS basic texts and international human rights instruments, including the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR).

Delivering judgment, however, Justice Sengu Koroma, the Judge Rapporteur, declined to grant the applicant’s prayer for any reparations or order for perpetual injunction against the respondent.

The court held that Adonor failed to establish a direct connection between the alleged violation of her rights and the Nigerian government or its agents.

The court further held that Nigeria had adequately investigated the complaints, while the individuals responsible for the alleged acts were private citizens, who had been detained and later released after due process.

“Additionally, the Applicant’s claims under Article 3, 6, 12, 14, and 21 of the ACHPR are dismissed for lack of facts sufficient and evidence to warrant relief sought thereunder.

“Furthermore, the National laws, such as Section 43 of the Nigerian Constitution, are outside of the Court competence,” the court said.

The court explained that after reviewing both parties’ submissions, it affirmed its jurisdiction to entertain the suit because the case pertained to alleged human rights violations within an ECOWAS member state.

It added that the application was admissible, because the Applicant had sufficiently demonstrated her victim status, and also met the necessary procedural requirements.

The three-member panel of the court which has Justices Ricardo Gonçalves (presiding); Sengu Koroma (rapporteur); and Edward Asante (member), ordered that both parties would bear their own costs.