14. The Respondent State prays the Court to: iv. Declare that it is not vested with jurisdiction to adjudicate the Application; v. Declare that the Application has not met the admissibility requirement provided by Rule 40(5) of the Rules of Court; vi. Declare that the application has not met the admissibility requirement provided by Rule 40(6) of the Rules of Court; and vii. Declare that the application is inadmissible and duly dismiss it. 15. The Respondent State further prays the Court to grant the following orders: i. That the Respondent State did not violate the Applicant’s rights provided under Articles 2, 3 and 7(1) of the Charter; ii. That the application is dismissed in its entirety for lack of merit; iii. That the Applicant’s prayers are dismissed; iv. That the Applicant should continue to serve his sentence; and v. V. That the Applicant should not be awarded reparations. JURISDICTION 16. 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. 17. The Court further observes that pursuant to Rule 49(1) of the Rules, it “shall conduct a preliminary examination of its jurisdiction […] in accordance with the Charter, the Protocol and these Rules.”3 3 Formerly, Rule 39(1), Rules of Court, 2 June 2010. 5