disputes” with the conjunction “and”, implying that the two terms are not interchangeable. 60. According to the Respondent State, invoking Articles 47 to 49 of the Charter is also inappropriate since they concern the referral of cases to the African Commission. Accordingly, it submits that the provisions of the Charter referred to in Article 7 of the Protocol as sources of law are substantive provisions on rights and duties and do not include the Articles invoked. 61. Citing the ICJ judgment on preliminary objections in the matter of Obligations Relating to Negotiations for Cessation of the Nuclear Arms Race and for Nuclear Disarmament (Marshall Islands v. United Kingdom), the Respondent State adds that several criteria are relevant in assessing the existence of a dispute. To this end, it avers that, while opposition of the Parties’ views could also be demonstrated by exchanges made in multilateral settings, the Court must give particular attention, inter alia, to the content of the statement[s] and to the identity of the intended addressees, together with any reaction thereto. Moreover, in its view, a statement can only give rise to a dispute if it refers to the subject-matter of a claim “with sufficient clarity for the State, which is the intended addressee of the [said] claim, to recognize that there is or may be a dispute concerning the subject-matter in question”. 62. Referencing the judgment of the ICJ in Questions Concerning the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite (Belgium v. Senegal), it argues that it must be given the opportunity to respond to the claim by the Applicant State. According to the Respondent State, this condition is satisfied when an allegation of a violation of law is expressly or implicitly rejected by another State, the implicit nature of the rejection being deducible from the silence of that State in situations where an express response is required. In this respect, the Respondent State references the ICJ judgment in Alleged Violations of Sovereign Rights and Maritime Spaces in the Caribbean Sea (Nicaragua v. Colombia). 16

Select target paragraph3