58. For the instant Appeal, it is apt to recall that in the First Instance Division, the Appellant was mainly challenging the 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th Respondents’ failure or delay to make their respective declarations to accept the jurisdiction of the African Court in line with Articles 5(3) and 34(6) of the Protocol. This, he contended, was an infringement of both the Treaty and of the Charter; as well as a contravention of the provisions of the Vienna Convention. 59. In this regard, Article 34 (6) of the Protocol provides as follows:“At the time of the ratification of this Protocol or any time thereafter, the State [Party] shall make a declaration accepting the competence of the Court to receive cases under Article 5(3) of this Protocol. The Court shall not receive any petition under Article 5(3) involving a State Party which has not made such a declaration.” [Emphasis added]. 60. Article 5(3) of the Protocol to which the above Article 34 (6) of the Charter makes reference, provides as follows:“3.The Court may entitle relevant non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) with observer status before the Commission and individuals to institute cases directly before it, in accordance with Article 34(6) of the Protocol” 61. The above cited Article 34 of the Protocol does not set any specific time limit within which a State Party must deposit its declaration. The wording “… or any time thereafter…”, far from stipulating a concrete deadline, provides instead a margin of discretion within which a State Parties may deposit their declarations. Therefore, a State Party which has not yet deposited the said declaration cannot be faulted under the above provision. 20