AFRICAN UNION UNION AFRICAINE UNIAO AFRICANA AFRICAN COURT ON HUMAN AND PEOPLES' RIGHTS COUR AFRICAINE DES OROITS DE L'HOMME ET DES PEUPLES SEPARATE OPINION OF VlCE-PRESIDENT FATSAII OUGUERGOUZ I fuJiy subscribe to the decision on the Court' s lack of jurisdiction to hear the Application filed against the African Union by Mr. Atabong Den is Atemnkeng. The Protocol establishing the Court indeed provides that only States Parties to tbe said Protocol may be brought before Lhe Court (see Articles 3 (I), 5 (l , lillera c)), 7, 26, 30, 31 and 34 (6)). The African Union not being a State entity party to the Protocol, the Court manifestly lacks the j urisdiction to bear this Application. Consequently, I am of the opinion that Lite Application ought not to have given rise to a judgment p er se on the basis of Article 52 (7) of the Rules, relating to preliminary o~jectio n s; it ought to have been dismissed de plano by a simple letter from the Registrar (see mutatis mutand1s my separate opinjon attached to the Court's judgment of 26 June 2012 in a similar case namely Femi £-'a/ana v. The Afru:an Union; see also my separate opinion attached to the decision of 30 September 2011 in the case of Efouu Mbozo 'o Samuel v. Pan African Parliament) . Besides, the fact Lhat the Court manifestly lacks the jurisdiction to hear this Application is clearly exhibited in the relative brevity of the reasons for the judgement (see paragraphs 36 to 40, and more specifically paragraphs 36 and 39). Robert Eno~16?) ., Re~r1strar ~