46. The Court observes that, at the time of filing the present Application, three months and two days had elapsed and the appeal proceedings were ongoing since the investigating chamber had not yet issued its decision. The Court thus finds that the Applicants seized the Court prematurely, since the proceedings before domestic courts were ongoing, so that local remedies were not exhausted. 47. Having found that local remedies were not exhausted, and considering that the admissibility requirements are cumulative, the Court will not proceed to examine the other remaining admissibility requirements under Rule 50(2)(f) and (g) of the Rules. 48. In view of the foregoing, the Court declares the Application inadmissible. VIII. COSTS 49. The Applicants pray that costs be borne by the Respondent State. 50. The Respondent State did not file any submission on costs. *** 51. Under Article 32(2) of the Rules, “unless otherwise decided by the Court, each party shall bear its own costs, if any”. 52. In the present case, the Court recalls that proceedings before it are free of charge and that, although the Applicants request that the costs be borne by the Respondent State, they do not provide any proof of the costs they incurred. 53. Consequently, the Court considers that nothing in the present case warrants a departure from the provisions of Rule 32(2) of the Rules of Court. 13