particular, encourage a closely-knit and effective network of African human rights advocates and organizations". 50. In the exercise of its mandate, SERAP has brought cases, petitions and requests for advisory opinion before the ECOWAS Community Court of Justice, the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights and the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights, against a number of African countries, including, Nigeria, The Gambia and Libya. 51. It follows from the foregoing that SERAP operates not only in Nigeria, but also within the West Africa region and the continent as a whole, and thus meets the description of an African organization within the meaning of Article 4 of the Protocol. ii. The meaning of the expression "recognized by the African Union" 52. It has been argued by the Applicant and certain States as well as the amicus curiae that every NGO with observer status before any organ of the African Union, particularly the Commission, is automatically an organization recognized by the African Union within the meaning of Article 4 (1) of the Protocol. 53. In the view of the Court, only African NGOs recognized by the African Union as an international organization with its own legal personality are covered by this Article, and may bring a request for Advisory Opinion before the Court. As a matter of fact, not only does Article 4 (1) of the Protocol make a clear distinction between "the African Union" on the one hand, and "any organ of the African Union" on the other, but in fact, the African Union has developed a system of recognition of NGOs distinct from that of the Commission. 54. Pursuant to Article 4(1) of the Protocol, in determining the entities empowered to make a request for Advisory Opinion, the Protocol clearly establishes a distinction between the African Union and any organ of the African Union and targets the two