12. On 11 June 2012, the Registry received the Applicant's response dated 6 June 2012. It acknowledged receipt thereof on the same day and forwarded it immediately to the Respondent. 13. By letter dated 25 June 2012, the Registry informed the parties that the written procedure had ended and that they could ask for leave to make additional submissions, if necessary. 14. By letter dated 27 June 2012, the Applicant submitted an application for leave to make additional submissions. 15. Without waiting for the said leave of the Court, the Applicant filed the said additional submissions. The Registrar acknowledged receipt on 2 July 2012. 16. By Order dated 7 December 2012, the Court rejected the Applicant's request for leave to make additional submissions as baseless and filed in violation of Rule 50 of the Rules of Court which provide that “No party may file additional evidence after the closure of pleadings except by leave of Court’. Ill. |THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE PARTIES A. THE SUBMISSION OF THE APPLICANT 17.\n his initial Application, the Applicant alleges that Article 34(6) of the Protocol Union, is inconsistent with the Treaty which namely, the Constitutive A hich oT Jif Ly established upholds A ae the African fundamental * Re j Dwwa — ,