24. The Court should have considered , even in a summary manner , the issue of the legal interest to act of the Tanganyika Law Society and the Legal Human Rights Center, the two non-governmental organizations which lodged the first applications. 25. Indeed, a distinction needs to be made between the "capacity to act" and "the interest to act" before the Co urt . The capac ity of an entity to act relates to its authority to appear before the Court and therefore comes 11 within the personal jurisdiction of the Court in relation to the Applicant. The interest to act , for its part, refers to the notion of legitimate interest , in other words the legally recognized or protected interest , the existence of which the Court has to independently determine in each case. ln other words the capacity to act deals with the app licant whereas the interest to act relates to the action that he or she undertakes. 26. An action before the Court is indeed only allowed if the applicant justifies his or her own interest in initiating it. To show proof of such interest, the applicant must accordingly demonstrate that the action or abstention of the Respondent State applies to a right which the applicant has or the right or an individual on beha lf of which it wishes to seize the Court.