institute cases directly before it, in accordance with article 34 (6) of this Protocol".
7. The Court further notes that Article 34(6) of the Protocol provides that "At the time of the ratification of
this Protocol or any time thereafter, the State shall make a declaration accepting the competence of the
Court to receive cases under Article 5(3) of this Protocol. The Court shall not receive any petition under
Article 5(3) involving a State Party which has not made such a declaration".
8. By a letter dated 18 June 2012, the Registrar inquired from the Legal Counsel of the African Union
Commission if the Republic of Tunisia has made the Declaration required under Article 34(6) of the
Protocol.
9. By an email dated 19 June 2012, the Legal Counsel of the African Union Commission informed the
Registry of the Court that the Republic of Tunisia had not made such a declaration.
10. The Court observes that the Republic of Tunisia has not made the declaration under Article 34(6).
11. In view of Articles 5(3) and 34(6) of the Protocol, it is evident that the Court manifestly lacks jurisdiction
to receive the Application submitted by Mr. Baghdadi Ali Mahmoudi, against the Republic of Tunisia.
12. For the Court to make an order for interim measures, it has to satisfy itself that it has prima facie
jurisdiction, which as indicated in paragraph 11 above, it does not have.
13. For these reasons,
THE COURT,
Unanimously:
i. Decides that pursuant to Articles 5(3) and 34(6) of the Protocol, it manifestly lacks jurisdiction to receive
the Application submitted by Mr. Baghdadi Ali Mahmoudi, against the Republic of Tunisia;
ii. Decides that in view of paragraph (i) above, it cannot grant the Applicant's request for provisional
measures.
Done at Arusha, this twenty-sixth day of June, Two Thousand and Twelve, in English and French,
the French text being authoritative.
Signed:
Gérard NIYUNGEKO, President
Robert ENO, Registrar
In conformity with Article 28 (7) of the Protocol and Rule 60 (5) of the Rules of Court, Judge Fatsah
OUGUERGOUZ appended a separate opinion to the present decision.
2