rights protected by the Charter or any other international human rights instruments ratified by a Respondent State. 28. The Applicants argue that there is no question as to the other aspects of the Court’s jurisdiction, namely: personal jurisdiction, given that the Respondent State is a party to the African Charter and the Protocol; temporal jurisdiction, since the alleged violations are continuous in nature as they remain convicted and subject to the death sentence as a result of the breach of their rights; and territorial jurisdiction, given that the violations of the Applicants’ rights occurred in the territory of the Respondent’s State, which is a party to the Charter and the Protocol. *** 29. The Court recalls that under Article 3(1) of the Protocol, it has jurisdiction to examine “all cases and disputes submitted to it concerning the interpretation and application of the Charter, th[e] Protocol and any other relevant Human Rights instrument ratified by the States concerned”.5 30. The Court notes that the Respondent State’s objection to material jurisdiction is framed in three limbs that this Court is being asked to sit as a court of first instance; as an appellate court and; as well as to quash and set aside the Applicants’ conviction and sentence. 31. With regard to the first limb of the objection, the Court observes that the claims6 made in the present Application also arose in substance before the national courts, where the Applicants challenged the processes leading to their conviction. The Respondent State thus had the opportunity to redress 5 Cheusi v. Tanzania (judgment), supra, §§ 37-39; Kalebi Elisamehe v. United Republic of Tanzania (judgment) (26 June 2020) 4 AfCLR 265, § 18; Gozbert Henrico v. United Republic of Tanzania, ACtHPR, Application No. 056/2016, Judgment of 10 January 2022 (merits and reparations), §§ 38-40. 6 Conviction based on circumstantial evidence; defence of alibi not being considered; trial not conducted within a reasonable time; failure to observe the right to consular services; coercion to record a statement through torture; failure to observe the right to equal protection of the law; and conviction of a mentally ill person. 9