00023 1 subject of the Application relates to the rights guaranteed by the Charter or any other relevant human rights instrument ratified by the States concerned.l 26.ln the instant case, the Court notes that the Application invokes violation of the human rights protected by the Charter and other human rights instruments ratified by the Respondent State. 27. Consequently, the Court dismisses the Respondent State's objection and finds that it has materialjurisdiction to hear the case. B. Other Aspects of jurisdiction 28.The Court notes that the personal, temporal and territorial aspects of jurisdiction have not been challenged by the Respondent State. Furthermore, there is nothing in the record indicating that it lacks personal, temporal and territorialjurisdiction. 29.The Court therefore finds that i. it has personaljurisdiction given that the Respondent State is a Party to the Protocol and has deposited the declaration prescribed under Article 34(6) thereof, allowing individuals to institute cases directly before it, in accordance with Article 5(3) of the Protocol; ii. it has temporaljurisdiction since the alleged violations are continuous, given that the Applicant remains sentenced on the basis of what he considers as irregularities2 iii. ; it has territorialjurisdiction because the facts took place in the territory of a State Party to the Protocol, that is, the Respondent State. 1 Application No. 005/2013. Judgment of 20111t2015, Atex Thomas v. united Repubtic of Tanzania v Tanzania Judgment). para. 45; Application No. 001/2012. Frank David Omary and Others v. tJnited Repubtic of Tanzania (hereinafter referred to as "Alex Thomas Judgment of 2810312014 (merits), (hereinafter refened to as "Frank Omary v Tanzania Judgment). para. 115; Application No. OO312O12. Ruling of 281312014, Peter Joseph Chacha v. United Republic of Tanzania (hereinafter referred to as "peter Chacha v Tanzania Judgment'). para. 114. 2Application No. 013/2011. Judgment of 211612013, Beneficiaries of Late Norbert Zongo and Others v. Burkina Faso (hereinafter referred to as "Norbeft Zongo v Burkina Faso Judgment). paras. Tg-74. 8