B. Other conditions of admissibility 52. The Court notes that there is no contention regarding compliance with the conditions set out in Rule 50(2)(a), (b), (c), (d) and (g) of the Rules. Nonetheless, it must satisfy itself that these conditions have been met. 53. From the records on file, the Court notes that the Applicant has been clearly identified by name, in fulfilment of Rule 50(2)(a) of the Rules. 54. The Court notes that the Applicant’s claims seek to protect his rights guaranteed under the Charter. It further notes that one of the objectives of the Constitutive Act of the African Union as stated in Article 3(h) thereof is, the promotion and protection of human and peoples’ rights. Furthermore, nothing on file indicates that the Application is incompatible with the Constitutive Act of the African Union, thus, the Application fulfils the requirement set out in Rule 50(2)(b) of the Rules. 55. The language used in the Application is not disparaging or insulting to the Respondent State or its institutions, in fulfilment of Rule 50(2)(c) of the Rules. 56. With regard to exhaustion of local remedies, the Court observes that the Applicant’s appeal before the Court of Appeal, the highest judicial organ of the Respondent State, was determined when that Court rendered its judgment on 28 November 2011. In light of this, the Court considers that the Respondent State had the opportunity to address the violations allegedly arising from the Applicant’s trial and appeals. 57. The Court notes that the Application is not based exclusively on news disseminated through mass media as it is founded on legal documents, in fulfilment with Rule 50(2)(d) of the Rules. 58. Furthermore, the Application does not concern a case which has already been settled by the Parties in accordance with the principles of the Charter 16