difficulties in complying with the Court's decision. The Respondent argued that the materials requested by the Court were not in its possession, but were with the Applicant and the Supreme Court of Rwanda and that it had no automatic right to possession of the materials requested. 61. The Respondent further argued that in complying with the Court's request, the Respondent would have to file an Application to the Supreme Court of Rwanda based on an Order of the Court and would have to prove why it would require such materials. 62. The Respondent contended that it is the Applicant who has relied on the materials and that pursuant to Rule 34(1), it is incumbent on the Applicant to file with the Court ail evidence intended to be relied on. 63. The Respondent further contended that even if the Supreme Court of Rwanda ordered the Respondent be given access to make copies of the materials, the cost would be prohibitive considering the volume of those documents. The Respondent averred that it was not sufficiently resourced and equipped to be able to foot the bills of the Applicant or those of the Court. 64. In determining this issue, the Court is guided by Rule 41 of its Rules which states: “The Court may, before the commencement of or during the course of the proceedings, call upon the parties to file any pertinent document or to provide any relevant explanation. The Court shall formally note any refusal to comply.” 65. The above Rule entitles the Court to request from any parly any document which in its view it deems as pertinent. 66. By the Respondent's own admission, the materials sought are in the exclusive possession of the Supreme Court of Rwanda. The Court is of the view that the materials sought are official state documents which are in the primary custody of the Respondent. These materials are public documents or part of national court proceedings which should be public in nature. 13