with the principles provided for in the provisions of the Charter and other human rights instruments referenced by the Applicants.11 57. Substantively, therefore, the Court considers that the ACERWC adjudicated on the same issues that the Applicants have brought before this Court. 12 The Court, therefore, finds that the second criterion has been met. 58. Concerning the third criterion which interrogates whether a first decision on merits exists, the Court notes that the ACERWC, as an “institution that is legally mandated to consider the dispute at international level”, 13 has delivered a decision on merits. 59. The Court, therefore, finds that this criterion has been met. 60. In sum, the Court finds that the cumulative criteria set out in the cases Gombert Jean-Claude Roger v. Republic of Côte d’Ivoire and in Dexter Eddie Johnson v. Republic of Ghana relating to the admissibility requirement established in Article 56(7) have been fulfilled. 61. For this reason, the Court finds that the instant Application raises issues that have already been settled within the meaning of Article 56(7) of the Charter and holds that this admissibility requirement has not been met. B. Other conditions of admissibility 62. The Court recalls that the conditions of admissibility of an application filed before it are cumulative, such that if one condition is not fulfilled then the By way of example, Article 3 of the African Children’s Charter provides for the right to nondiscrimination, and this is mirrored by Article 2 of the Charter; and Article 11 of the African Children’s Charter provides for the right to education and this is captured in Article 17 of the Charter. 12 Dexter Eddie Johnson v. Republic of Ghana (jurisdiction and admissibility) (28 March 2019) 3 AfCLR 99, § 52. 13 Dexter Eddie Johnson v. Republic of Ghana (jurisdiction and admissibility) (28 March 2019) 3 AfCLR 99, § 51. 11 18