56. In light of the above, the Court finds that the period of six (6) months and nine (9) days is manifestly reasonable within the meaning of Article 56(6) of the Charter and Rule 50(2)(f) of the Rules. The Court, therefore, dismisses the Respondent State’s objection to the admissibility of the Application. B. Other conditions of admissibility 57. The Court observes that no objection has been raised with respect to the other admissibility requirements. Nonetheless, in line with Rule 50(1) of the Rules, it must satisfy itself that the Application is admissible before proceeding. 58. From the record, the Court notes that the Applicant has been clearly identified by name in fulfilment of Rule 50(2)(a) of the Rules. 59. The Court also notes that the claims made by the Applicant seek to protect his rights guaranteed under the Charter. Furthermore, 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. Additionally, the Application does not contain any claim or prayer that is incompatible with a provision of the said Act. Therefore, the Court considers that the Application is compatible with the Constitutive Act of the African Union and the Charter and holds that it meets the requirement of Rule 50(2)(b) of the Rules. 60. 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. 61. The Application is not based exclusively on news disseminated through mass media as it is founded on court documents from the domestic courts of the Respondent State in fulfilment of Rule 50(2)(d) of the Rules. 17