- 17C. Objections based on Article 40 of the Rules 1). Objections to the admissibility of the application drawn from the incompatibility of the application with the Constitutive Act of the African Union and the Charter. 60. Rule 40(2) of the Rules provides as follows: "to be compatible with the Constitutive Act of the African Union and the Charter". 61. The Respondent State claims that the name mentioned in the Application, not being that of Burkina Faso, a State Party to the Constitutive Act of the African Union and the Charter, the Application should be declared inadmissible as it is inconsistent with Rule 40 (2) of the Rules, for being incompatible with the Charter. 62. The Court notes in this regard that the argument of the Respondent State rests on the allegation that the name on the Application, which is "People's Democratic Republic of Burkina Faso", does not refer to it. As the Court has already decided, in the present case, the Respondent State is Burkina Faso. The Application is not therefore incompatible with the Constitutive Act of the African Union or the Charter. 63. The Court therefore holds that the Application cannot be deemed inadmissible in this case on the grounds of the alleged failure to comply with the provisions of Rule 40 (2) of the Rules. 2). Objection based on the nature of the language used in the Application 64. Rule 40(3) of the Rules provides that [the Application] "must not contain disparaging and insulting language". ~·· ~7