V. JURISDICTION 17. The Court observes 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. 18. In accordance with Rule 49(1) of the Rules, “the Court shall conduct preliminary examination of its jurisdiction … of an Application in accordance with the Charter, the Protocol and these Rules.” 19. On the basis of the above-cited provisions, the Court must, in every application, preliminarily, conduct an assessment of its jurisdiction and dispose of objections thereto, if any. 20. In the present Application, the Court notes that the Respondent State has raised an objection to its material jurisdiction. The Court will thus, first, consider the objection to its material jurisdiction (A) before assessing other aspects of its jurisdiction (B). A. Objection to the material jurisdiction of the Court 21. The Respondent State contends that the Applicant is requesting the Court to release him from prison, alleging that its domestic courts poorly evaluated the evidence on the basis of which he was convicted. According to the Respondent State, the request by the Applicant requires the Court to sit as an appellate court, which is not within the competence of the Court. The Respondent State submits that Article 3 of the Protocol does not confer on the Court the jurisdiction to sit as an appellate court and adjudicate on matters that have been decided by its highest court. In support of its