vii. Order the Applicant to bear the costs of this Application. V. JURISDICTION 13. The Court observes that Article 3 of the Protocol provides as follows: 1. The jurisdiction of the Court shall extend to all cases and disputes submitted to it concerning the interpretation and application of the Charter, this Protocol and any other relevant Human Rights instrument ratified by the States concerned. 2. In the event of a dispute as to whether the Court has jurisdiction, the Court shall decide. 14. In accordance with Rule 49(1) of the Rules, “the Court shall conduct preliminary examination of its jurisdiction … of an Application in accordance with the Charter, the Protocol and these Rules.” 15. Based on the above-cited provisions, the Court must, in every application, conduct a preliminary assessment of its jurisdiction and dispose of objections thereto, if any. 16. In the present case, the Court notes that the Respondent State raises an objection to its material jurisdiction. The Court will, thus, address (A) this objection before dealing with other aspects of its jurisdiction (B), if necessary. A. Objection to material jurisdiction 17. Citing Ernest Francis Mtingwi v. Malawi, the Respondent State avers that the Court has no appellate jurisdiction to determine matters that have been determined conclusively by the Court of Appeal of Tanzania, in particular, the admission of an extra-judicial statement as evidence. Further, the Respondent State argues that the Court does not have jurisdiction to quash 6