23.The Court recalls that in Andrew Ambrose Tanzania,’ Umuhoza it held, reaffirming v Rwanda,® that its the Cheusi earlier decision withdrawal of a v United Republic in Ingabire Declaration of Victoire deposited pursuant to Article 34(6) of the Protocol does not have any retroactive effect and it also has no bearing on matters pending Declaration, as is the case of the present prior to the filing of the Application. The Court also confirmed that any withdrawal of the Declaration takes effect twelve (12) months after the notice of withdrawal is filed. In respect of the Respondent State, therefore, its withdrawal will take effect on 22 November 2020. 24.In light of the foregoing, the Court finds that it has personal jurisdiction to examine the present Application. C. Other aspects of jurisdiction 25. The Court notes that nothing on file indicates that the Court does not have jurisdiction in respect of the temporal and territorial aspects thereof. The Court therefore holds that: i. it has temporal jurisdiction in as much as the alleged violations are continuous in nature since the Applicant remains convicted on the basis of what he considers an unfair process.® ii. it has territorial jurisdiction given that the facts of the matter occurred in the territory of the Respondent State. 26.In view of the aforesaid, the Court holds that it has jurisdiction to hear the instant case. 4 Andrew Ambrose Cheusi v United Republic of Tanzania, AfCHPR, Application No. 004/2015, Judgment of 26 June 2020, §§ 35-39. 5 Ingabire Victoire Umuhoza v United Republic of Rwanda (procedure) (2016) 1 AfCLR 562, § 67. 6 See Beneficiaries of late Norbert Zongo, Abdoulaye Nikiema alias Ablassé, Ernest Zongo, Blaise llboudo and Mouvement Burkinabé des Droits de I'Homme et des Peuples v Burkina Faso (preliminary objections) (2013) 1 AfCLR 197, §§ 71-77.