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. 13. The Court further notes that pursuant to Rule 49(1) of the Rules it “…shall conduct preliminarily examination of its jurisdiction…in accordance with the Charter, the Protocol and these Rules.” 14. In this Application, the Respondent State objects to the Court’s material jurisdiction. The Court will, therefore, consider the said objection before examining other aspects of jurisdiction, if necessary. A. Objection to material jurisdiction 15. The Respondent State submits that the violations alleged by the Applicant on evidentiary issues call upon the Court to act as a court of appeal. 16. Furthermore, citing the case of Ernest Mtingwi v. Republic of Malawi, the Respondent State contends that the Court is not vested with jurisdiction to sit as an appellate court and adjudicate on matters that have been finalised by the highest court of the Respondent State. 17. On his part, the Applicant avers that the Court has jurisdiction to determine this Application. He argues that, contrary to the Respondent State’s assertion, he is not requesting the Court to sit as an appellate court but rather to remedy the violation of his rights as pleaded. *** 18. The Court recalls, as it has consistently held in accordance with Article 3(1) of the Protocol, that it has jurisdiction to consider any Application filed 5