Constitutive Act, all Members States of the AU have undertaken to “promote and protect human and peoples’ rights in accordance with the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and other relevant human rights instruments.” By making this commitment, they assumed the obligation to uphold human rights in all circumstances. 45. In exercising its advisory jurisdiction, the Court does not resolve factual disputes between opposing parties. Its main duty is to provide its opinion by answering questions raised by the Author of the Request, as envisaged by Article 4(1) of the Protocol.15 Any use of examples simply serves to highlight the practical dimensions of the opinion and does not amount to a decision on any factual situation described in those illustrations.16 46. The Court further recalls that it can be requested to provide an advisory opinion by any Member State of the AU and is not limited to those States that have ratified the Protocol or any other AU human rights instruments. Therefore, the Court reaffirms that its advisory opinions are designed to provide guidance to all Member States of the AU in fulfilling their international human rights commitments.17 47. The Court makes it clear that this Opinion does not seek to examine the lawfulness of any specific elections that were held or postponed during the Covid19 Pandemic, much less to assess the extent to which they were free, fair and transparent. 15 The Pan African Lawyers Union (PALU) (Advisory Opinion), § 36. See also, Inter-American Human Rights, Advisory Opinion OC-18/03 of September 17, 2003 Requested by the United States, Juridical condition and rights of undocumented migrants §§ 63-65. 16 Ibidem. 17 The Pan African Lawyers Union (PALU) (Advisory Opinion), § 37. See also, Inter-American Human Rights, Advisory Opinion OC-18/03 of September 17, 2003 Requested by the United States, Juridical condition and rights of undocumented migrants, § 64. 13 Court of Mexican Court of Mexican