caution that was uncorroborated and which the Applicant had in any case withdrawn." 16. ln its Response, with respect to the jurisdiction and admissibility of the Application, the Respondent State prays the Court to: 'i. Hold that the Application has not invoked the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court; ii. Dismiss the Application for non-compliance with the admissibility conditions stipulated under Rule 40 (S) of the Rules." 17. With respect to the merits of the Application, the Respondent State prays the court to rule that it has not violated Articles 1 , 2, 9,4, s, 6, 7 (1Xc) and 7 (2) of the Charter. 18. The Respondent State therefore prays the Court to dismiss the Application for lack of merit, as well as the Applicant's request for reparations and rule that the Applicant should continue to serve his prison sentence. V. JURISDICTION 19. Pursuant to Rule 39(1) of its Rules, the Court "shall conduct preliminary examination of its jurisdiction. .. ." A. Objectiononmaterialjurisdiction 20. The Respondent State submits that the Applicant requires this Court to act as an Appeal Court or Supreme Court, whereas it does not have the power to do so. 21. According to the Respondent State, Article 3 of the Protocol does not give the Court the latitude to adjudicate on issues that have not been raised by the Applicant before the national courts, review judgments rendered by the said rts, reassess the evidence and make a finding T 4 6 ry s