affected;4 iii. Temporal jurisdiction, insofar as the alleged violations occurred after the Respondent State became a party to the Protocol; iv. Territorial jurisdiction, insofar as the facts of the case took place in the territory of the Respondent State. 17. In the light of the foregoing, the Court finds that it has jurisdiction to consider the present Application. VI. ADMISSIBILITY 18. The Court notes that the Respondent State raises a preliminary objection to the admissibility of the Application. The Court will first examine this objection before examining, if necessary, the admissibility requirements provided for in the Charter and the Rules. A. Preliminary objection to admissibility 19. The Respondent State raises a preliminary objection to admissibility of the Application based on the Applicant’s lack of standing, arguing that the minutes of the family meeting signed by the victim’s siblings show that Lahoui SEÏDOU was designated as custodian of the deceased’s children, all minors at the time of the facts. On 1 September 2019, Lahoui SEÏDOU gave a power of attorney to Mr Renaud AGBODJO to seize the Court. 20. It avers that the Applicant seized the Court in her name, on her behalf and on behalf of her father’s other children. It states that by acting as such, the Applicant is acting as the representative of the family of the deceased whereas she has not been given any power of attorney to act in that capacity. 4 See paragraph 2 of this Judgment. 7