23. The Court recalls that, under Article 3(1) of the Protocol, it is has jurisdiction to examine “all cases and disputes submitted to it concerning the interpretation and application of the Charter, this Protocol and any other relevant human rights instrument ratified by the States concerned”. 24. The Court emphasizes that for it to assume material jurisdiction, it is sufficient that the Applicant alleges violations of human rights protected by the Charter or any other human rights instrument ratified by the Respondent State.4 In the present case, the Applicant alleges violation of Articles 2, 3(1)(2), and 7(1)(c) of the Charter. 25. The Court recalls its established jurisprudence, that it is not an appellate court in respect of decisions handed down by national courts.5 However, “this does not preclude it from examining relevant proceedings in the national courts in order to determine whether they are in accordance with the standards set out in the Charter or by other human instruments ratified by the States concerned”.6 The Court would therefore not be acting as an appellate court if it were to examine the Applicant’s allegations. 26. In view of the above, the Court dismisses the Respondent State’s objection and holds that it has material jurisdiction to examine the present Application. B. Other aspects of jurisdiction 27. The Court notes that the Respondent State does not contest its personal, temporal or territorial jurisdiction. Having found that nothing on record indicates that it lacks jurisdiction in these respects, the Court considers that it has: 4 Diocles William v. United Republic of Tanzania (merits and reparations) (21 September 2018) 2 AfCLR 426, § 28; Armand Guéhi v. United Republic of Tanzania (merits and reparations) (7 December 2018) 2 AfCLR 477, § 33; Kalebi Elisamehe v. United Republic of Tanzania (merits and reparations) (26 June 2020) 4 AfCLR 265, § 18. 5 Ernest Francis Mtingwi v. Republic of Malawi (jurisdiction) (15 March 2013) 1 AfCLR 190, § 14. 6 Kennedy Ivan v. United Republic of Tanzania (merits and reparations) (28 March 2019) 3 AfCLR 48, § 26; Guéhi v. Tanzania, supra, §§ 33. 7

Sélectionner le paragraphe cible3