55. From the foregoing, the Court considers that the duration of four years, one month and 24 days taken by the Applicant in the present case is reasonable within the meaning of Article 56(6) of the Charter and, therefore, holds that the Application complies with Rule 50(f) of the Rules. 56. Finally, regarding the requirement contained in Rule 50(2)(g) of the Rules, the Court notes that the Application does not concern a matter which has already been adjudged and determined by the parties, pursuant to the principles of the United Nations Charter, the Constitutive Act and the Charter. 57. Accordingly, the Court holds that the Application meets all admissibility requirements under Article 56 of the Charter, as restated in Rule 50(2) of the Rules, and accordingly declares it admissible. VII. MERITS 58. The Applicant alleges that the Respondent State violated the Tunisian people’s right to self-determination and their right to freely determine their political status (A), as well as its obligation to guarantee the independence of the courts (B). Without expressly doing so, the Applicant also alleges in her pleadings a violation of the principle of independence of the legislature from the executive (C). The Court will address each of the allegations individually. A. Alleged violation of the right to self-determination and the right of the Tunisian people to freely determine their political status. 59. The Applicant alleges that the Respondent State violated the Tunisian people's right to freely determine their political status, protected by Article 20 of the Charter. She maintains that the failure to hold a referendum before the promulgation of the 27 January 2014 Constitution is a violation of the people’s right to self-determination insofar as they were not afforded the 16