II I shall st.ali. by noting that, in his request, Mr. Falana makes no reference 4. to the provisions of the Protocol relating to the Court's jurisdiction in contentious matters (Articles 3 and 5); he merely indicates that "the Application [is brought] pursuant to Rule 29 of the Rules of the African Court which provides that "the Court may also, if il deems il necessary, hear, under rule 45 of the Rules the individual or NGO that initiated a Communication to the Commission pursuant to Article 55 of the Charter"" . This request, which the Registry did nol notify to the African Commission nor to other entities Listed in Article 35 (3) of the Rules of Court, ought therefore to have been dealt with by way of a simple administrative action, in other words rejected de plano by letter from the Registrar same as in all other cases recently dealt with by the Court in which 2 it rnanifesl1y lacked jurisdiclion. 5. lt was indeed by offi ce mail signed by Lbe Registrar or Deputy Registrar that "Applications" riled by individua ls against non-Slate entities 6. such as the Europea n Court of Human Rights or the Conference lnterafric aine des Marches des Assurances (C£MA) were rejected. 7. Ln his reply to the author of the latter request, the Registrar thus stated as follows: "[... ] 1 would like to infonn you that the Court has no jurisdiction to bear such an appeal for two main reasons: I ) The Court on ly receives petitions against States 3 (Article 3 oflhe Protocol). 2) [ .. . ]". ln the reply to the request filed against the European Court of Human 8. Rights (and France), the Registrat stated that: Until the 26 June 2014 decision by the Court dismissing the Appllcatmn filed agamsl Tunisia (Baghdadi Ali Mahmoudi v. the Republic of Tunisia), Applications filed against African States that are not Parties to the Protocol or have not made the optional declaration under Article 34 of the Protocol were subJect to judicial dctermmalion by the Court and dismissed by a decision of the latter (see my separate opinion appended Lo this decision of 26 June 20 14): after this date, similar Applications were dismissed by way of a simple administrative action (letter from the Registry). 2 Letter from lhe Registrar dated 26 June 20 15 (Ref AFCI-U>RJReg./06/008) in reply to Mr. Roger Kamdem's request against CIMA received at the Registry on 10 June 2015 and dated 19 [sic] June 20 15. 3