000396 il temporal jurisdiction, insofar as the alleged violation in the present case, namely, the fact that the national courts have not adopted measures to remedy the violations committed against the Applicants, is continuous; iii. territorial jurisdiction, insofar as the facts occurred in the territory of the Respondent State, a State Party to the Protocol. 18.1n light of the foregoing, the Court finds that it has jurisdiction to hear the instant c€rse VI. 19. ADMISSIBILITY OF THE APPLICATION ln terms of Article 6(2) of the Protocol: "The Court shall rule on the admissibility of cases taking into account the provisions of article 56 of the Charter". ln accordance with Rule 39(1) of the Rules: "The Court shall conduct preliminary examination of ... the admissibility of the application in accordance with Articles .. . 56 of the Charter and Rule 40 of these Rules'. 20. Rule 40 of the Rules, which restates the content of Article 56 of the Charter, reads as follows: "Pursuant to the provisions of Article 56 of the Charter to which Article 6 (2) of the Protocol refers, in order to be examined, applications shall comply with the following conditions: 1. disclose the identity of the Applicant notwithstanding the latter's request for anonymity; 2. comply with the Constitutive Act of the Union and the Charter; 3. not contain any disparaging or insulting language; 4. not be based exclusively on news disseminated through the mass media; 5. be filed after exhausting local remedies, if any, unless it is obvious that the procedure in unduly prolonged; 6. be filed within a reasonable time from the date local remedies were exhausted or from the date set by the Court as being the commencement of the time limit within which it shall be seized with the 7 v$r /T-\\ 2,7 \rL atter; and o r-| \Y,) \ -l-X i(.rj