80. The Court, therefore, dismisses the objection in this respect. iv. Objection on the ground that certain allegations are being raised for the first time 81. The Respondent State maintains that the alleged violations of the right to an effective remedy, the right to reparation for harm suffered, the right to life, the right to the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, the right to a satisfactory environment and the right to information were never raised in the domestic proceedings. According to the Respondent State, the national judicial system did not have the opportunity to remedy the violations. * 82. In response, the Applicants maintain that the Respondent State’s argument is unfounded insofar as the grievances they raise before this Court were also raised in the domestic judicial proceedings. *** 83. The Court considers that this objection is linked to the exhaustion of local remedies and it will, therefore, examine it to the extent that it relates to the admissibility requirements provided for by the Charter. B. Admissibility requirements provided for in Article 56 of the Charter 84. According to Article 6(2) of the Protocol, “the Court shall rule on the admissibility of cases taking into account the provisions of Article 56 of the Charter”. In accordance with Rule 50(1) of the Rules, “The 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”. 22