32. The Applicant submits that his Application fulfils the admissibility conditions specified under Rule 50 of the Rules. Although this Application is being considered in default, in line with Rule 50(1) of the Rules, the Court must still satisfy itself that the Application fulfils all the admissibility requirements before proceeding. 33. From the record, the Court notes that the Applicant has been clearly identified by name, in fulfilment of Rule 50(2)(a) of the Rules. 34. The Court also notes that the claims made by the Applicant seek to protect his rights guaranteed under the Charter. Furthermore, one of the objectives of the Constitutive Act of the African Union, as stated in Article 3(h) thereof, is the promotion and protection of human and peoples’ rights. Additionally, the Application does not contain any claim or prayer that is incompatible with a provision of the said Act. Therefore, the Court considers that the Application is compatible with the Constitutive Act of the African Union and the Charter and holds that it meets the requirement of Rule 50(2)(b) of the Rules. 35. The Court further notes 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. 36. The Application is not based exclusively on news disseminated through mass media, as it is founded on court documents from the domestic courts of the Respondent State, in fulfilment of Rule 50(2)(d) of the Rules. 37. Regarding to the requirement of exhaustion of local remedies, it is clear, from the record, that the Applicant appealed his conviction and sentence up to the Court of Appeal, the highest judicial organ of the Respondent State. This appeal was determined when that Court of Appeal rendered its judgment on 18 April 2013. The Court finds, based on foregoing, that the requirement of exhaustion of local remedies has been met in accordance with Rule 50(2)(e) of the Rules. 9