005073 v. Find that the Respondent State in not responsible for the actions of the persons who are not acting on behalf of the State. V. JURISDICTION 2/7.Pursuant to Article 3(1) of the Protocol, “the jurisdiction of the Court shall extend to all cases and disputes submitted to it concerning the interpretation and application of the Charter, this Protocol concemed.” and In any other accordance relevant with human Rule 39(1) rights of the instruments Rules, ratified “the Court by the shall States conduct preliminary examination of its jurisdiction...” A. Objections to material jurisdiction 28. The Respondent State raises four objections to the material jurisdiction of the Court as follows: (1) (ii) (iii) (iv) That the Protocol has not been domesticated: The Application does not raise human rights claims; |§ That domestic courts have jurisdiction over human rights matters and; That this Court cannot review decisions of the Respondent State’s Supreme Court. i. Objection that the Protocol has not been domesticated. 29. The Respondent State contends that its courts are not bound by the Protocol because, although it has ratified the Protocol, it is yet to domesticate it into its laws. 30. The Applicant avers that the Court has jurisdiction because the Respondent has ratified the Protocol and deposited the Declaration Se of the Protocol. required State under Article 34 (6)