10. Having declared that it manifestly lacks jurisdiction to consider the Application, the Court decided to transfer the latter to the African Commission relying on Article 6 (3) of the Protocol, which provides that “the Court may consider cases or transfer them to the Commission”. 11. The practice of such a transfer was established by the Court in its decision regarding its jurisdiction in respect of the abovementioned Application N° 002/2011. The Court upheld the practice when, at the same session, it dealt with Applications N° 005/2011 (Daniel Amare & Mulugeta Amare vs Mozambique Airlines & Mozambique) and N° 006/2011 (Association des Juristes d’ Afrique pour la bonne gouvernance vs Céte d’Ivoire), and also declared that it manifestly lacks jurisdiction to consider such applications. 12. In my view, the transfer to the African Commission of an application in respect of which the Court found that it manifestly lacks jurisdiction is not founded in law. I hold that this transfer does not appear to be consistent with Article 6 of the Protocol, when interpreted according to the general rules of interpretation as set out in the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. 13. Indeed, the heading of this Article 6 (“Admissibility of Cases”) strongly suggests that the action available to the Court, in paragraph 3, applies primarily to the consideration of the admissibility of a case over which the jurisdiction of the Court has already been established. Unfortunately, the “travaux préparatoires” of the Protocol do not shed any light on the meaning to be attributed to the said paragraph 3; the first version of this paragraph read that “the Court may itself consider cases or transfer them to the Commission ”.” 14. When read in that context, this paragraph allows the Court either to consider, on its own, the admissibility of an application which is within its jurisdiction or to entrust consideration of the said admissibility to the African Commission. In the latter assumption, the Court would be assigning to the Commission a broader responsibility beyond that envisaged in Article 6 (1). 2 Article 6 of the Draft Protocol, as adopted by the first meeting of Governmental Legal Experts (Cape Town, South Africa, 6-12 September 1995), see Draft Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples ’Rights on the Establishment of an African Court of Human and Peoples’Rights, adopted by the Meeting of Government Legal Experts Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples’Rights, 6-12 September Cape Town, South Africa, DOC OAU/LEG/EXP/AFC/HPR/PRO (I) Rev. 1. on the 1995,