203. The Court reaffirms, as it has already held in paragraph 190, that with regard to procedural issues and, more specifically issues relating to the admissibility of Applications, it cannot apply texts other than the Charter, the Protocol, its Rules, and, if necessary, universally accepted general principles of procedure. It, therefore ,follows that the rules prescribed by the Constitutive Act cannot be cited to bar proceedings before this Court. 204. Accordingly, the objection to admissibility based on non-compliance with the prior non-judicial procedure under the Constitutive Act is dismissed. iii. Objection to admission based on abuse of process 205. Citing the jurisprudence of the ICJ, in particular the judgments on preliminary objections in the matters of Immunities and Criminal Proceedings (Equatorial Guinea v. France) and Certain Iranian Assets (Islamic Republic of Iran v. United States of America), the Respondent State argues that abuse of process may be a ground for inadmissibility of an application. It asserts that such an abuse is [t]he improper use of procedural rights or instruments by one or more parties for purposes other than those for which they were intended, in particular for purposes which are fraudulent, dilatory or frivolous, with a view to causing prejudice or gaining an improper advantage, [...] reducing or eliminating the effectiveness of another available procedure, or for purposes of pure propaganda ... [or] an action with a view to securing a fair hearing .... [or an] action with malicious intent or in bad faith. 206. The Respondent State contends that the present Application is an abuse of process insofar as, first, for the same facts and remedies sought, proceedings have been initiated or are pending before the East African Court of Justice (hereinafter referred to as “the EACJ”), and second, at the time of filing the present Application, the Applicant State failed to disclose or produce material facts relevant to the Application, contrary to Rule 41(3)(c) 48