V. JURISDICTION 25. 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. 26. The Court further observes that in terms of Rule 39(1) of the Rules "[t]he Court shall conduct preliminary examination of its jurisdiction ..." 27. Therefore, the Court must first ascertain its jurisdiction in accordance with the Charter, the Protocol and the Rules, and dispose of objections, if any, to its jurisdiction. A. Objection to the Court’s material jurisdiction 28. The Respondent State raises an objection to the material jurisdiction of the Court because the Application is primarily based on allegations that it violated Article 30 of the Protocol. 29. According to the Respondent State, the Applicants are seeking the Court to order the suspension of the application of Law N° 2019-708 of 5 August 2019 on the recomposition of the IEC, as long as it is not amended to be compliant with the Court's judgement of 18 November 2016. 30. This means, in the view of the Respondent State, that the Applicants are requesting the Court to monitor the execution of its judgments despite there being no provision, either in the competence on the Court. Charter or in the Protocol, that confers such a