47. The Court also observes that the period between 2007 and 2013 were the early years of the Court’s operation, when members of the general public, let alone persons in the situation of the present Applicant, could not have been fully aware of the existence of the Court. 48. In view of the foregoing, the Court finds the filing of the Application within a period of five (5) years, four (4) months and three (3) days is justified and thus, his Application is deemed to have been filed within a reasonable time in accordance with Article 56 (6) of the Charter and Rule 50(2)(f) of the Rules. B. Other admissibility requirements 49. The Court notes that the requirements in sub-rules 50 (2)(a), (b), (c), (d), (e) and (g) of the Rules, are not in contention between the Parties. Nevertheless, it must still ascertain that these requirements have been fulfilled before proceeding. 50. From the records, the Court notes that the Applicant is clearly identified by name in fulfilment of Rule 50(2)(a) of the Rules. 51. The Court also notes that the Applicant’s claims seek to protect his rights guaranteed under the Charter. Further, Article 3(h) of the Constitutive Act of the African Union (AU), lists the promotion and protection of human and peoples’ rights among the objectives of the AU. Therefore, the Court holds that the Application is compatible with the Constitutive Act of the AU and the Charter, and thus, fulfils the requirement of Rule 50(2)(b) of the Rules. 52. The Court further notes that the language used in the Application is neither disparaging nor insulting with regard to the Respondent State, its institutions or the African Union, in compliance with the Rule 50(2)(c) of the Rules. 53. Besides, the Application is also not based exclusively on news disseminated through mass media, rather, it is based on judicial decisions from the