25. Under Rule 49(1) of the Rules,4 “The Court shall conduct a preliminary examination of its jurisdiction […] in accordance with the Charter, the Protocol and these Rules”. 26. Based on the above-cited provisions, the Court must, in every Application, preliminarily ascertain its jurisdiction and rule on objections thereto, if any. 27. The Court recalls that the Respondent State did not file any submissions. Nevertheless, in accordance with Article 49(1) of the Rules, it must ensure that all aspects of its jurisdiction are established. In this regard, the Court notes that it has: i. Material jurisdiction, insofar as the Applicants allege violation of human rights protected by the Charter, to which the Respondent State is a party. ii. Personal jurisdiction, insofar as, as indicated earlier in this Ruling, the Respondent State deposited the Declaration on 28 July 1998. . iii. Temporal jurisdiction, insofar as the alleged violations were committed after the entry into force of the Protocol in relation to the Respondent State. iv. Territorial jurisdiction, insofar as the facts of the case occurred in the Respondent State’s territory. 28. Accordingly, the Court declares that it has jurisdiction to entertain the instant Application. VII. ADMISSIBILITY 29. Article 6(2) of the Protocol provides that: 4 Rule 39(1) of the Rules of 2 June 2010. 7