VI. ADMISSIBILITY 37. The Court notes that the Respondent State raises objections to the admissibility of the Application that are not provided for either in the Charter or the Rules of Court. The Court will rule on those objections (A) before examining the admissibility requirements laid down in those instruments, if necessary (B). A. Objections based on admissibility requirements not provided for by the Charter and the Rules . 38. The Court notes that the Respondent State raises preliminary objections to the admissibility of the Application, alleging (1) abuse of the right to institute legal proceedings, (2) lack of connection between the main Application and the supplementary Application and (3) lack of standing on the part of the Applicant. 39. The Court emphasizes that though these requirements are not specifically provided for either in the Charter or in the Rules, it is required to examine them. i. On abuse of the right to bring legal proceedings 40. The Respondent State alleges that the “unknown��� Applicant makes abusive use of “actio popularis” by using access to the Court to lodge several applications filed under Nos. “207/2019, 218/2019, 232/2019, 316/2019, 316/2019, 317/2019, 349/2019, 391/2019 and 447/2019”. It asserts that the number and closeness of the filing dates of these applications sufficiently demonstrate that they are frivolous. The Respondent State further contends that the Applicant is using the Court as a political forum to criticize it. Accordingly, it submits that the Application be declared inadmissible for abuse of the right to bring proceedings. * 11