nothing on file indicates that the Application is incompatible with the Constitutive Act of the African Union. The Court holds, therefore, that the requirement of Rule 50(2)(b) of the Rules is met. 67. The Court also finds that the language used in the Application is not disparaging or insulting to the Respondent State or its institutions in fulfilment of Rule 50(2)(c) of the Rules. 68. The Court further finds that the Application is not based exclusively on news disseminated through mass media as it is founded on legal documents in fulfilment with Rule 50(2)(d) of the Rules. 69. Concerning the admissibility requirement specified in Article 56(7) of the Charter, the Court notes that there is nothing on record to show that the Application concerns a case which has already been settled by the Parties in accordance with the principles of the Charter of the United Nations, the Constitutive Act of the African Union, the provisions of the Charter or of any legal instrument of the African Union. The Court, thus, finds that the Application complies with Rule 50(2)(g) of the Rules. 70. Given all the above, the Court finds the Applicant’s allegations admissible save for the allegation relating to his prolonged detention before trial. VII. MERITS 71. The Applicant alleges that the Respondent State violated his rights under Articles 1, 3, 4 and 5 of the Charter. In his elaboration, however, the Applicant has not, with clarity, articulated the Respondent State’s conduct that, supposedly, trigger the violation of each of the articles of the Charter that he has cited. Overall, however, the Court notes that two major grievances underlie the Applicant’s case and these are that he was tortured and that the domestic courts convicted him based on unlawfully obtained 16