committed by their aggressor, adding that this constitutes a violation of Article 3 (a) of the Maputo Protocol. III. SUMMARY OF THE PROCEDURE BEFORE THE COURT 15.The Application was received at the Court Registry on 1 July, 2016 and served on the Respondent state on 26 Jury, 2016- The Respondent state was requested to fonnrard its Response to the Application within sixty (60) days, pursuant to Rules 35 (4) and 37 of the Rutes of Court (hereinafter referred to as "the Rules"). 16'on 18 October, 2016, the Registry transmitted the Application to the other states Parties and entities as mentioned in Rute 35 (3) of the Rutes. 17'On 28 November,2016, the Respondent State filed its Response to the Application, which was transmitted to the Applicants on 13 December, 2016. 18'On 1 February,2017, the Applicants filed their Reply to the Respondent State,s Response which was fonryarded to the Respondent State on 2 Febru ary, 2011. 19'on 21 February,2017, the Registry notified the Parties that the Court would close the written procedure and set down the case for deriberation. 20'On 28 February,2017, the Respondent State transmitted to the Court an application for leave to file additional pleadings in accordance with Rule 50 of the Rules of Court. At its 44th Ordinary Session held from 6 to 24 March, 2011, the Court accepted the application; and on 20 March, 2017,the Registry notified the Respondent State that it has been altowed thirty (30) days to file its submissions. 21'on 5 April, 2017, the Respondent State filed its Rejoinder and this was served on the Applicants on 10 April, 2011. 5 M J,