their legal submission in urging the Court to grant the reliefs sought in this application. In opposing the grant of relief sought by the Applicant, the Respondents’ Counsel filed a 17 paragraphs counter affidavit an accompanying written address which the Respondents’ Counsel adopted as their oral legal submission in opposing this application vide a Motion No. SS/M.20/2022 wherein time was extended for the Respondent to file their counter affidavit on the 7/2/2022. In arguing the application, the Applicant’s Counsel formulated three (3) issues for determination as follows:1. Whether by the circumstance of this case, the Applicant’s fundamental rights have been breached. 2. Whether this Honourable Court has the requisite jurisdiction to grant the application. 3. Whether the Applicant is entitled to compensation.” The Respondent’s Counsel on the other hand, did not formulate any issue for determination in the adopted written address. Upon consideration of the processes filed by the parties and the issues formulated by the Applicant, this court for the purpose of this Judgment, has formulated one (1) issue for determination that is wholistic enough to take care of all the issues formulated in this application and is hereby produced below as follows:“Whether in view of the facts and circumstances of the case of the Applicant including the available evidence as presented by parties, the Page 4 of 9