is only one aspect of jurisdiction. Jurisdiction also covers personal, temporal and territorial jurisdiction. 35. In view of the aforesaid jurisdiction considerations, raised by the Respondent the Court dismisses State. the objection to its It holds that it has jurisdiction ratione materiae to examine the instant case given the fact that all the alleged violations (supra, para 5) prima facie concern the right to fair trial®, as guaranteed especially by Article 7 of the Charter. B) Other aspects of jurisdiction 36. With regard to the other aspects of its jurisdiction, the Court notes: (i) that it has jurisdiction ratione personae in respect of the two Parties given the fact that the United Republic of Tanzania made the requisite declaration under the aforementioned (ii) that it has continuous Article 34(6) on 29 March 2010; jurisdiction in nature, ratione temporis the Applicant having since the remained alleged violations convicted are on grounds which he believes are flawed by irregularities [see the Court’s jurisprudence in the Zongo case]’; (iii) that it has jurisdiction ratione loci in as much as the facts of the case occurred on the territory of a State Party to the Protocol, i.e. the Respondent State. 37. It therefore follows from all the preceding considerations, that the Court is fully competent to hear the instant case. ® See in this Republic of Chacha, 28 Charter. The regard the Judgments of this Court in the Matter of Franck David Omary and Others v. United Tanzania, Judgment of 28 March 2014, paras 74 and 75 and in the Matter of Joseph Peter March 2014, para 115: “The rights alleged to have been violated are protected under the Court therefore finds that it has jurisdiction ratione materiae over the Application’. 7 See African Court especially in the Matter of Zongo and Others v. Burkina Faso (Preliminary Objections) Judgment of 21 June 2013, paras 71 to 77. eC 15 8 ay C Ap a ar #&.