ii. 78. Court’s Jurisdiction ratione personae and temporis The parties did not address the Court on these two aspects of its jurisdiction. Rule 39(1) of the Rules however requires the Court to “. . conduct preliminary examination of its jurisdiction and the admissibility of the application in accordance with articles 50 and 56 of the Charter, and Rule 40 of these Rules’. 79. In conformity with Rule 39(1) of its Rules therefore, the Court will proceed to examine its jurisdiction ratione personae and ratione temporis. 80. With respect to its personal jurisdiction, the Protocol requires that a State against which an action is brought should not only have ratified the mentioned applications Protocol and the other in Article 3(1) thereof, from individuals, human but should have made rights instruments also, with respect the declaration to required under Article 34(6) of the Protocol, recognising the jurisdiction of this Court to hear cases from individuals. In the instant case, the status of ratification of African Union Instruments indicates that the United Republic of Tanzania became a party to the Protocol on 7 February 2006, and deposited the declaration under Article 34(6) on 29 March 2006. The Court also observes that the Applicants, all nationals of the Respondent State, are individuals. On these-bases, that it has jurisdiction ration personae, the Court holds .° ie we ie we ° 7” J —— Ja oO ae