i. A Declaration that it did not violate the rights to life, dignity and effective remedy of persons with albinism protected under Article 4, 5 and 7 of the Charter; ii. A Declaration that it did not violate the right to freedom from torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment protected under Article 5 of the Charter, Article 7 of the ICCPR, and Article 16 of the Children’s Charter; iii. A Declaration that it did not violate Article 29 of the Children’s Charter; iv. A Declaration that it did not violate Article 2 of the Charter and Article 3 of the Children’s Charter; v. Dismiss the Application with costs; vi. Dismiss the prayers on reparations as baseless, misconceived and untenable. V. JURISDICTION 29. The Court notes that Article 3 of the Protocol provides as follows: 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. 30. Pursuant to Rule 49(1) of the Rules, “[t]he Court shall conduct preliminarily examination of its jurisdiction…in accordance with the Charter, the Protocol and these Rules.” 31. On the basis of the above-cited provisions, the Court must conduct an assessment of its jurisdiction and dispose of objections thereto, if any. 32. The Respondent State raises an objection to the temporal jurisdiction of the Court. The Court will therefore consider the said objection before examining other conditions of admissibility, if necessary. 9