the instant matter, the Applicant alleges the violation of different rights protected under the Charter, specifically Articles 2, 3, and 7(1) of the Charter. 25. With regard to the objection, the Court recalls its established jurisprudence that it is not an appellate body with respect to decisions of national courts.8 However, “this does not preclude it from examining relevant proceedings in the national courts in order to determine whether they are in accordance with the standards set out in the Charter or any other human rights instruments ratified by the State concerned”.9 The Court would, therefore, not be sitting as an appellate court if it were to consider the Applicant’s allegations. The Court, therefore, dismisses this objection and finds that it has jurisdiction to hear the instant Application. 26. The Court further notes the Respondent State’s claim that it does not have jurisdiction to grant an order for release. In this regard, the Court recalls Article 27(1) of the Protocol which provides that “[i]f the Court finds that there has been violation of a human or peoples’ right, it shall make appropriate orders to remedy the violation, including the payment of fair compensation or reparation.” Therefore, the Court has jurisdiction to grant different types of reparations, including release from prison, provided that the alleged violation has been established.10 27. For these reasons, the Court dismisses the objection by the Respondent State and finds that it has material jurisdiction in this Application. B. Other aspects of jurisdiction 28. The Court observes that no objection has been raised with respect to its personal, temporal and territorial jurisdiction. Nonetheless, in line with Rule 8 Ernest Francis Mtingwi v. Republic of Malawi (jurisdiction) (15 March 2013) AfCLR 190, § 14. Kenedy Ivan v. United Republic of Tanzania (merits and reparations) (28 March 2019) 3 AfCLR 48, § 26; Guéhi v. Tanzania, supra, § 33. 10 Rajabu Yusuph v. United Republic of Tanzania, ACtHPR, Application No. 036/2017 Ruling of 24 March 2022 (jurisdiction and admissibility), § 27. 9 8