19. In the instant case, the Court notes that the alleged violations are based on the alleged denial of the right to a fair trial in the national courts, which occurred between 1993 and 2003. In this regard, the alleged violations occurred after the Respondent State had ratified the Charter but prior to the ratification of the Protocol and the deposit of the Declaration on 29 March 2010. However, the alleged violations continued thereafter since the Applicant is on death-row based on his conviction by the national courts from procedures that he considers to be unfair.3 Consequently, the Court finds that it has temporal jurisdiction. 20. The Court also notes that it has territorial jurisdiction, given that the facts of the case occurred in the Respondent State’s territory. 21. In light of the foregoing, the Court holds that it has jurisdiction to hear this Application. VI. ADMISSIBILITY 22. Article 6(2) of the Protocol provides: “the Court shall rule on the admissibility of cases taking into account the provisions of article 56 of the Charter.” 23. Pursuant to Rule 50(1) of the Rules, “[t]he Court shall ascertain the admissibility of an Application filed before it in accordance with Article 56 of the Charter, Article 6 (2) of the Protocol and these Rules.” 24. Rule 50(2) of the Rules, which in substance restates the provisions of Article 56 of the Charter, provides as follows: Applications filed before the Court shall comply with all of the following conditions: 3 Jebra Kambole v. United Republic of Tanzania, ACtHPR, Application No. 018/2018, Judgment of 15 July 2020 (merits and reparations), § 24; Dismas Bunyerere v. United Republic of Tanzania, (merits and reparations) (28 November 2019) 3 AfCLR 702, § 28(ii); Norbert Zongo and Others v. Burkina Faso (preliminary objections) (25 June 2013) 1 AfCLR 197, §§ 71-77. 6