36. The Applicant submits further that execution of judgment No. 0071 3C.COR of 18 October 2018 rendered by CRIET, would have unforeseeable consequences for him, and prays the Court take the decision for a stay of execution of the said judgment, as a matter of urgency. 37. The Respondent State submits that the Applicant cannot ask the Court for a stay of execution of a judgment of a Benin court under Benin's positive law and the laws declared by the Constitutional Court as being in conformity with Benin's Constitution. 38. It further submits that it is established jurisprudence that community courts do not have jurisdiction to issue injunctions to Member States in respect of their domestic laws and procedures; adding that to admit such injunctions would lead to the obliteration of domestic court decisions. The Respondent State also refers to the Applicant's cassation appeal, describing the same as premature and unfounded. 39. Finally, the Respondent State prays the Court to dismiss the Applicant's claims as premature and baseless. .** 40. The Court notes that Article 27(2) of the Protocol provides that: "In cases of extreme gravity and urgency, and when necessary to avoid irreparable harm to persons, the Court shall adopt such provisional measures as it deems necessary". 41. Further, Rule 51 (1) of the Rules provides that the Court may: "[ajt the request of a party, the Commission or on its own accord, prescribe to the parties any interim measure which it deems necessary to adopt in the interest of the parties or of justice."