000{98 On reparations "e. That the death penalty was imposed on the Applicant in accordance with the proper judicial process in Ghana and was therefore not in violation of Article 4, 5 and 7 of the Charter; f. That the Respondent State has not violated Article 1 of the Charter. g. That Applicant has not established any grounds for reparations and as such the reparations sought by the Applicants should be denied." V. JURISDICTION 26. Under Article 3(1) of the Protocol the "jurisdiction of the Court shall extend to all cases and disputes submitted to it concerning the interpretation and application of the Charter, this Protocol and any other relevant Human Rights instrument ratified by the States concerned." Further, in terms of Rule 39(1) of the Rules "the Court shall conduct preliminary examination of its jurisdiction 27. .. . ". The Applicant submits that the Court has previously ruled that as long as the rights alleged by the Applicant(s) are protected by the Charter or any other human rights instrument ratified by the State in question then the Court will have jurisdiction over the matter.3 ln the present Application, the Applicant set out the specific provisions of the Charter, the ICCPR and the UDHR that he alleges have been violated by the Respondent State and submitted that the Court has materialjurisdiction to hear this matter.4 28. The Applicant further avers that the Court has personal jurisdiction, temporal jurisdiction and territorialjurisdiction in the present matter. 3Application No.006/2013. Judgment Republic of Tanzania, S 57. ot 1810312016 (Merits), Wilfred Onyango Nganyi & Others v lJnited 4 The Applicant alleges that the Respondent State has violated Articles 4, 5 and 7 of the Charter together with Articles 6(1), 7 , 14(1) and 14(5) of the ICCPR and Articles 3, 5 and 10 of the UDHR. 9 Yl=-L @