Arusha, Tanzania Email: registrar@african-court.org Website: www.african-court.org Telephone: +255-272-510-510 JUDGMENT SUMMARY violations of rights guaranteed in the Charter or any other human rights instruments ratified by the Respondent State. Recalling that in the instant case, the Applicants alleged violations of rights protected under previously cited provisions of the Charter, ICCPR and UDHR, to to which the Respondent State is a party, the Court held that it cannot be said that it would be acting as a court of instance by examining the present Application. Accordingly, the Court equally dismissed this second limb of the objection. In light of the foregoing, the Court dismissed the Respondent State’s objection and held that it has material jurisdiction to determine the present Application. Regarding other aspects of jurisdiction, the Court found that it had personal jurisdiction, as the Application was filed before the Respondent State’s withdrawal of its Article 34(6) Declaration under the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights (the Protocol) took effect. It also held that it had temporal jurisdiction since the alleged violations were of a continuing nature, and territorial jurisdiction as the violations occurred within the territory of the Respondent State. As a consequence of its findings on all aspects of its jurisdiction, the Court unanimously, declared that it has jurisdiction to hear the Application. On admissibility, the Respondent State averred that the alleged prohibition involving prisoners and detainees’ rights to vote had previously been subjected to domestic judicial scrutiny. It further averred that similar claims had been considered by its High Court in the public interest case of Tito Elia Magoti and Another vs National Electoral Commission and 2 Others, where that court declared the provisions of Section 11(1)(c) of the NEA unconstitutional and void. It submits that, in the case cited, an appeal is pending before the Court of Appeal whose outcome the Applicants in the present Application are obliged to await in order to fulfil the requirement of exhaustion of domestic remedies. 3