00094 s b) That the Application has not met the admissibility requirements stipulated under Rule 40(1-7) of the Rules of the Court or Article 56 and Article 6(2) of the Protocol; c) That the Application be dismissed in accordance to Rule 38 of the Rules of court; d) e) That the costs of the Application be borne by the Applicant; and That no reparation be awarded in favour of the Applicant." 13.The Respondent State thus prays the Court to find that it has not violated Articles 2,3(1),3(2), 7(1Xc) and 7(1Xd) of the Charter. 14.1n his Reply, the Applicant prays the Court to dismiss the Respondent State's objections and avers that the Application has merit and should be determined. V. JURISDICTION 15. Pursuant to 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 instruments ratified by the States concerned.' ln accordance with Rule 39(1) of the Rules, "[tJhe Court shall conduct preliminary examination of its jurisdiction...' 16. The Respondent State raises an objection to the material jurisdiction of the Court A. Objection to material jurisdiction 17. The Respondent State avers that the jurisdiction of the Court has not been properly invoked by the Applicants. ln this regard, it asserts that Article 3 (1) of the Protocol and Rule 26 of the Rules only affords the Court jurisdiction to deal with cases or disputes concerning the application and interpretation of the 5 o > \l-