(iii) declare that the Respondent has not violated the Applicant's right to personalfreedom and the right to life; (iv) declare that the allegations of corruption are false; (v) dismiss the Application for lack of merit, and (vi) grant it leave to file additional evidence pursuant to Rule 50 of the Rules of Court. V. 29. JURISDICTION ln terms of Rule 39 (1) of its Rules, "the Court shall conduct preliminary examination of its jurisdiction .. . " 30.In this respect, the Respondent State raises objection to the material jurisdiction of the Court on which the Court shall make a ruling before considering other aspects of jurisdiction. A. Objection to the Gourt's materialjurisdiction 31.The Respondent State raises objection to the material jurisdiction of the Court by invoking Article 3 (1) of the Protocol and Rule 26 (1) and (2) of the Rules which provide that "the Court shall have jurisdiction to deal with all the cases and all disputes submitted to it concerning interpretation and application of the Charter, the Protocol and any other relevant instrument on human rights ratified by the States concerned". 32.The Respondent State argues that, contrary to the above provisions, the Applicant does not request the Court to interpret or apply an Article of the Charter or the Rules, nor invoke any human rights instrument ratified by the United Republic of Tanzania. 33.The Applicant refutes the Respondent State's objection to the Court's material jurisdiction, contending that even in the absence of any express reference to the Charter or the Protocol, the alleged violations fall within the ambit of the international instruments in respect of which the Court has jurisdiction. *** t/.) 8 9 7/ t\