vii. Observe that the anonymous Applicant is using the present Court as a public forum; viii. Find that the ECHR ruled that a request is deemed abusive if an applicant brings multiple moot applications and that it is contrary to the objective of the right to a remedy; ix. Find that the Application is abusive and frivolous; x. Find that the Applicant lacks interest in bringing the Application. xi. Find that local remedies were not exhausted; xii. Consequently, declare the Application inadmissible; xiii. Declare that the Respondent State did not take any measures to limit the protection of the rights guaranteed by the Charter; xiv. Find that the Amnesty Law was adopted after investigations; xv. Find that an Amnesty Law does not undermine the protection of patrimonial interests; xvi. Find that the judicial inquiry did not establish its responsibility for the deaths; xvii. Accordingly, dismiss the Application; xviii. Find the proceedings initiated by the Applicant unfounded; xix. Consequently, order the Applicant to pay the Respondent State reparation in the amount of Two Billion (2,000,000,000) CFA francs for all the damages suffered and costs incurred. V. JURISDICTION 13. Article 3 of the Protocol provides that: 1. The jurisdiction of the Court shall extend to all disputes submitted to it concerning the interpretation and application of the Charter, this Protocol and any other relevant instrument ratified by the State concerned. 2. In the event of a dispute as to whether the Court has jurisdiction, the Court shall decide. 6