31. By a letter dated 4 May 2016, the Registry served the observations of the Respondent on the Court's Order of 18 March 2016 on the Applicant, and requested her observations, if to submit her observations if any, within 15 days. 32. By a letter dated 4 May 2016, the Registry served the observations of the Applicant on the Court's Order of 18 March 2016 on the Respondent, and requested the Respondent to submit its observations if any, within 15 days. 33. By a letter dated 4 May 2016, the Registry transmitted to the Coalition with copy to the Parties, the Court's Decision granting it amicus curiae status and requesting it to submit its observations by 13 May 2016. 34. By a letter dated 13 May 2016, the Coalition submitted its observations. 35. This Ruling is with respect to the jurisdiction of the Court in light of the Respondent's withdrawal of its declaration pursuant to Article 34(6) of the Protocol. IV. 36. Positions of the Parties In the Respondent's written submissions of 13 April 2016, on the question of the effects of its withdrawal, the Respondent avers that by virtue of the principle of parallelism of forms, it is only the AUC that is empowered to decide on the withdrawal and its effects. The Respondent argues that the Court and Parties to the Application have nothing to do with the decision regarding the withdrawal of its declaration once it was deposited with the AUC. The Respondent further indicates that in its letter dated 3 March 2016, it was only requesting to be heard by the Court on its request to suspend hearings and not on the question of the withdrawal. 8