it has been bestowe d with quasi-ju dicial powers
to
recei ve commun icalions and
investig ate any matter prescrib ed by the Childre n's Charter. 2 The Commit tee adds
that the mandate of the CoUlt wilJ complem ent that of the Comm.j ttee and thus,
ensw·e effectiv e protectio n of the riglJls and weJ fare of the child in A£rica. 3
3.
On the substanc e of the request, the Commit tee submits that on the proper
interpre tation of Article 4 (1) of U1e Court Protoco l and Rule 68 (1) of the Rules,
the Court has jurisdic tion lo provide an advisory opinion upon the request of the
African Union or any of its organs rep1·esenting it in speci fie matters, such as the
Commit tee. 4
4.
The CoJ111ruttee has also sought right of ac<.:ess before the Court in
contenti ous matters pursuan t to Atiicle 5 (1) (e)
or the Court Protoco l and Rule 33
(1) (e) of the Rules and mainly based its request on the contenti on that the mandate
of t.he Court will complem ent that of the Commit tee and thus, ensure effectiv e
protecti on of the Tights and welfare of the child in Africa. 5
5.
With regard lo the Applica ble Jaw, the Commit tee relies on certain
provisio ns of the Protoco l, namely, the fifth preambu lar paragrap h as well as
Article 3, which provides for the contenti ous jurisdic tion of the Court. In addition ,
the Commit tee cites Article 5 (1) (e) of the Protoco l as weLl as Rule 33 (l) (e) of
the Rules, which provide s for access to the Cowi by African Intergov ernment al
Organis ations. With regard to advisory jurisdict ion of the Court, the Commit tee
cites Article 4 of the Protoco l, which provides for the advisory jurisdic tion of the
'Ibid
' Ibid, at paragraph 2
• Ibid, at paragraph 3
&
Ibid, at paragraph 2
3