9. Regarding the second alleged violations), reason given the Court ought by the Court to have (the continuation examined closely and possibly establish a distinction between of the these allegations more the “instantaneous” and the “continuous” facts, as it appropriately did in another judgment delivered on the same day, in the matter of the Beneficiaries of late Norbert Zongo and al. v, Burkina Article Faso*, It should have 15 of the Charter Malawi) was not asked itself whether (the dismissal an the alleged violation of the Applicant “instantaneous” fact Article 7 of the Charter matter) was not a (the manner “continuous” in which fact, by the University of outside jurisdiction of the Court, and whether on the contrary the ratione temporis the alleged violation of the local which of Courts falls within handled its the temporal jurisdiction. An indepth analysis of these issues would have enabled the Court to arrive at a more informed conclusion with regard to its jursdiction ratione temporis. 10. In our opinion, the Court therefore missed an opportunity to make clear jurisprudence on an issue which will likely resurface in the future. Ill. The issue of exhaustion of local remedies 11, The most serious problem raised by the judgment of the Court however is its approach and decision on the question of exhaustion of local remedies. After a summary of how the various local Courts handled the matter on several occasions (paragraphs 21 to 28 and 39), the Court concludes in substance that the Applicant did not exhaust appeal which he had local remedies, because he did not argue the brought before the High Court against a decision of the Industrial Relations Court, and that under such conditions, he could not go to the Supreme Court of Appeal if he were not to be satisfied with the decision of the High Court regarding his claims (paragraph 40.1). ‘The 21 June 2013 judgment, paragraph 63. for reparation for unlawful dismissal Nt